Upper Big Branch Security Chief Charged with Obstruction of Justice and False Statements

Amplify’d from pittsburgh.fbi.gov

Upper Big Branch Security Chief Charged with Obstruction of Justice and False Statements

CHARLESTON, WV—Hughie Elbert Stover, 60, of Clear Fork, Raleigh County, West Virginia, has been charged with two felonies in connection with the federal investigation of events at Massey Energy Company's Upper Big Branch Mine (UBB). Stover is chief of security at UBB and at least two other Massey operations. A federal grand jury indicted Stover last week on charges of making false statements to federal agents and obstructing a federal investigation. The indictment was unsealed today after Stover was arrested at his home.

According to the indictment unsealed today, Stover made materially false statements to an FBI special agent and a special investigator for the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA). These federal agents were investigating allegations that security guards at UBB routinely notified mine personnel when MHSA inspectors arrived at the mine. Allegedly, Stover falsely denied that such a practice existed and falsely told the agents that he would have fired any security guard who provided such advance notice. According to the indictment, Stover himself instructed UBB security guards to notify mine personnel whenever MSHA inspectors arrived at the mine.

The indictment also alleges that Stover recently caused a person known to the grand jury to dispose of thousands of pages of security-related documents stored in a Massey building near the UBB mine, with the intent to impede the federal investigation.

"The conduct charged by the grand jury—obstruction of justice and false statements to federal investigators—threatens our effort to find out what happened at Upper Big Branch," said U.S. Attorney Booth Goodwin. "With 29 coal miners lost and thousands more waiting for answers about what caused the disaster, this inquiry is simply too important to tolerate any attempt to hinder it. My office will continue to devote every available resource to this most critical of cases."

"The explosion at Upper Big Branch was a national tragedy, and this investigation is a priority for the Department of Justice," said Assistant Attorney General Lanny A. Breuer of the Criminal Division. "The indictment unsealed today shows our deep commitment to getting to the truth about what happened, including holding to account anyone who may impede this critical investigation."

The charges against Stover result from an investigation by the FBI and the Department of Labor's Office of Inspector General, with assistance from MSHA special investigators detailed to the criminal probe.

Stover is scheduled to be arraigned on March 15, at 11 a.m., in Beckley, W. Va. Read more at pittsburgh.fbi.gov

 

See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/bs9mk

Serial Rapist Investigation Expands FBI and Local Law Enforcement Seek Public’s Assistance

Amplify’d from washingtondc.fbi.gov

Serial Rapist Investigation Expands to Digital Billboards on the East Coast FBI and Local Law Enforcement Seek Public’s Assistance

Today, the FBI, with the Fairfax County, Prince William County, Prince George's County, Leesburg, New Haven, and Cranston Police Departments, launched a digital billboard campaign to assist in a serial rape investigation involving 12 sexual assaults or attempted sexual assaults between 1997 and 2009 by the same offender. Each of these assaults is linked by DNA.

Digital billboards featuring composite sketches of the offender are now running in Connecticut, Maryland, Rhode Island, and Virginia, where the attacks and attempts have occurred, as well as in neighboring states—New Jersey, New York, and Delaware. Since the start of the FBI's digital billboard partnership, at least 39 cases have been solved as a direct result from tips from the public. "These billboards give each local police department and the FBI an added edge to identifying, locating, and apprehending the subject," said Ronald Hosko, Special Agent in Charge of the Criminal Division, FBI, Washington Field Office. "The public is the most important tool law enforcement has for solving crime."

Fairfax County Police Department has launched a dedicated website, www.EastCoastRapist.com, which provides composite sketches and additional description of the offender. "We have the DNA linking the offender, but we need someone to recognize and identify him," said John Kelly, detective with the Fairfax County Police Department.

Victims in the assaults have been black, white, and Hispanic females. The offender generally approaches the victims outdoors on foot and threatens them with a weapon; usually a knife or a handgun. In two of the earliest assaults, the offender approached the victims on a bike. The offender sometimes wears a black mask or hooded sweatshirt to conceal his face. After approaching the victim, the offender asks the victim for money, giving the victim the impression that she is being robbed, but does not take anything after the assault is over. The dates and locations of these assaults are:

Date	Location		Date	Location
Feb. 19, 1997	Forestville, MD		May 24, 2001	Leesburg, VA
Aug. 20, 1997	Suitland, MD		Aug. 16, 2001	Temple Hills, MD
July 3, 1998	Temple Hills, MD		Dec. 28, 2001	Alexandria, VA
Jun.19, 1999	Alexandria, VA		Nov. 28, 2006	Cranston, RI
Jan. 13, 2000	Alexandria, VA		Jan. 10, 2007	New Haven, CT
Nov. 20, 2000	Alexandria, VA		Oct. 31, 2009	Woodbridge, VA

Prince George's County Police Department is offering up to a $25,000 reward for information related to this investigation. Law enforcement agencies involved are asking that anyone who may have knowledge of this subject contact the Crime Solvers hotline at 1-866-411-TIPS/ 8477. Read more at washingtondc.fbi.gov

 

See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/bs9mh

Video: http://mediamatters.org/blog/201102280020

Amplify’d from www.debbieschlussel.com

ABC,”View” Hags Host Jew-Hating 9/11 Truther Nut to Defend Charlie Sheen

By Debbie Schlussel

For once, the George Soros Nazi-funded Media Matters for America and I agree. Why did ABC host neo-Nazi, 9/11 truther, America-hating, anti-Jewish wack-job Alex Jones on its airwaves to defend Jew-hater Charlie Sheen, this morning? If this were 1940, you can bet the network would have given Father Coughlin a similar podium.

As should be apparent to anyone, of course Charlie Sheen is an anti-Semite.  And he’s a 9/11 truther nut.  And, as we know, that’s in addition to his bevy of porn stars and hookers, record of violence against women, and all-around drug-addled idiocy.  But, not to the moronic hags of ABC’s “The View.”  Today, they polluted the airwaves with Alex Jones–another well-known Jew-hater and 9/11 truther nut.  He was on to talk about how “my good friend, Charlie Sheen” is “not” an anti-Semite.   I’m surprised that Jones didn’t use his usual anti-Semitic rants about the “Zionists,” the “neocons,” “the bankers,” and Israel. He was probably told by “View” producers–who know very well who Jones is–not to. (And when you have to tell someone not to say those things on the air, maybe it’s a giant clue that you shouldn’t invite them on.)

But Jones, predictably used the opportunity to repeatedly plug his conspiracy theories about how the government “took down Building 7″ in the World Trade Center area, and the fiction that America “killed 1,000,000 people” in the Iraq War.  (Reality check:  that’s actually a low-balled number of Iraqis that Saddam Hussein and the Iranians murdered. But why confuse us with the facts?)  Also predictable, Jones repeatedly plugged his anti-Semitic, anti-American, 9/11 truther, anti-Israel website.

Right now, David Duke is wishing he was friends with Sheen because, hey, then, he could get free national airtime with these completely irresponsible, airheaded hags, too.  Of course, being the idiots that they are, the hags didn’t know what to say or how to react to Jones.  After all, before Jones came on the show, queen airhead Elisabeth Hasselbeck also blamed “Two and a Half Men” writer Chuck Lorre for Sheen’s anti-Semitism.  That’s typical for this uninformed idiota.  Memo to Elizabeth:  when you start calling someone by their Hebrew name to score Brownie points with the Jew-haters, you’re a Jew-hater.  It’s that simple.  There is no legitimizing it.  There are no excuses.  There is no moral equivalence.

But on “The View”–where millions of stupid American women get their worldview–there are all of these things.  This Hasseldumb moron-ette is quite selective in her outrage.  She insisted that Don Imus should be fired for his comments about Rutgers basketball players’ being “nappy headed,” but on the “Chaim Levine” comment by Sheen (about Jewish writer, Lorre), she’s all about blaming the Jew.  Yup, that’s the ticket.  We all know where she would have been 70 years ago in Germany.  Joining Carlos Estevez (yup, that’s Charlie Sheen’s real name, but you can’t say that or you’re a bigot; only Heeb names are allowed)  in helping guys like Chuck Lorre/”Chaim Levine” into the train car.

But I don’t completely blame “The View” hags and ABC for bringing this Jew-hating, America-hating conspiracy theorist and FoCS (Friend of Charlie Sheen) and letting him go on and on with his lies about “The Zionists!”  I blame people like Matt Drudge, a self-hating Jew who has been promoting and linking to the nutty Jones on a regular basis.  Drudge, whose mother is Jewish, apparently had a bad experience as a kid in a Jewish summer camp.  It made him hate Jews.  And that’s why you regularly see anti-Israel headlines linked on The Drudge Report.  It’s also why you regularly see links to Alex Jones.  As I noted, Jones is truly no different from David Duke, except that he’s even more unhinged.  Both hate Jews, both hate Israel, both are 9/11 truthers, and both are extremist fringe characters.  But only one of them is friends with Charlie Sheen.

Matt Drudge gave Alex Jones more publicity, mainstream exposure and respect, and, now, as a result of all of that, he has a seat at the table on an ABC show.

Get a clue, Matt:  if Jones and Sheen were in charge, you’d be in the camps right there with me.  And we’d know your Hebrew name, too.

For the record, my Hebrew name is Chayah Devorah.  Put that in your ovens, er . . . pipes, and smoke it. Read more at www.debbieschlussel.com

 

See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/bs9lj

Amplify’d from www.albertmohler.com

Universalism as a Lure? The Emerging Case of Rob Bell

As is so often the case, most of us first learned of Rob Bell’s new book by means of Justin Taylor and his blog, “Between Two Worlds,” at the Gospel Coalition. Justin reminds me of the steady folks at the National Hurricane Center. He is able to advise of looming disaster with amazing calmness. That is why I took special notice of Justin’s stern warning: “It is unspeakably sad when those called to be ministers of the Word distort the gospel and deceive the people of God with false doctrine.”

Why would Justin feel the need to issue such a warning? He was writing about Rob Bell’s forthcoming book, Love Wins: A Book About Heaven, Hell, and the Fate of Every Person Who Ever Lived, due to be released on March 29 by HarperCollins.

The publisher’s statement about the book is clearly intended to provoke controversy:

Fans flock to his Facebook page, his NOOMA videos have been viewed by millions, and his Sunday sermons are attended by 10,000 parishioners—with a downloadable podcast reaching 50,000 more. An electrifying, unconventional pastor whom Time magazine calls “a singular rock star in the church world,” Rob Bell is the most vibrant, central religious leader of the millennial generation. Now, in Love Wins: Heaven, Hell, and the Fate of Every Person Who Ever Lived, Bell addresses one of the most controversial issues of faith—the afterlife—arguing that a loving God would never sentence human souls to eternal suffering. With searing insight, Bell puts hell on trial, and his message is decidedly optimistic—eternal life doesn’t start when we die; it starts right now. And ultimately, Love Wins.

Now, Rob Bell and others within the Emerging Church movement represent what can only be described as a new form of cultural Christianity. Bell plays with theology the way a cat plays with a mouse. His sermons, videos, books, and public relations are often more suggestive and subversive than clear. They are also artistically and aesthetically superior to most of what is to be found in the video section of your local Christian bookstore or on the Web.

Time is running out on the Emerging folks. They can play the game of suggestion for only so long. Eventually, the hard questions will be answered. Tragically, when the answers do come, as with the case of Brian McLaren, they appear as nothing more than a mildly updated form of Protestant liberalism.

The publicity surrounding Bell’s new book indicates that he is ready to answer one of the hardest questions — the question of the exclusivity of the Gospel of Christ. With that question come the related questions of heaven, hell, judgment, and the fate of the unregenerate. The Bible answers these questions clearly enough, but few issues are as hard to reconcile with the modern or postmodern mind than this. Of course, it was hard to reconcile with the ancient mind as well. The singularity of the person and work of Christ and the necessity of personal faith in him for salvation run counter to the pluralistic bent of the human mind, but this is nothing less than the wisdom of God and the power of God unto salvation.

Universalism and the various inclusivisms are exactly what Justin Taylor suggests — distortions of the Gospel that deceive the people of God (and non-Christians as well).

But what if all this is just clever advertising? What if Rob Bell’s book turns out to be an affirmation of the truth? Did Justin jump the gun?

There is good reason to doubt this. The most powerful argument about the book comes in the form of a video offered by Rob Bell himself. In the video, he pulls no punches. In his clever and artistic way, ever so artfully presented, he affirms what can only be described as universalism.

We must await the release of the full book in order to know what Rob Bell is really saying, but his advance promotion for the book is already saying something, and it is not good. The material he has already put forth does demand and deserve attention.

The Emerging Church movement is known for its slick and sophisticated presentation. It wears irony and condescension as normal attire. Regardless of how Rob Bell’s book turns out, its promotion is the sad equivalent of a theological striptease.

The Gospel is too precious and important to be commodified in this manner. The questions he asks are too important to leave so tantalizingly unanswered. Universalism is a heresy, not a lure to use in order to sell books. This much we know, almost a month before the book is to be released.

I am always glad to hear from readers. Write me at mail@albertmohler.com. Follow regular updates on Twitter at www.twitter.com/AlbertMohler.

Related Posts The Spiritual State of the Emerging Generation: A Conversation with Christian Smith (Audio) The Question of Truth and the Emerging Church (Audio) What Should We Think of the Emerging Church? Part One Today’s Radio — Video Games and the Lure of the Unreal What’s Emerging from the Emergent Church? Read more at www.albertmohler.com

 

See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/bs9l3

Amplify’d from www.albertmohler.com

How Did this Happen? Why Same-Sex Marriage Makes Sense to So Many

Same-sex marriage is not an idea that emerged from a vacuum. The project of normalizing homosexuality has deep roots and ideological momentum.

Why does same-sex marriage make sense to so many people? The momentum toward the full legalization of same-sex marriage seems to intensify with every passing month — or even faster. The moral divide in this nation is now seen most clearly in the distance between those for whom marriage is exclusively heterosexual and thus a settled issue and, on the other hand, those who honestly see the legalization of same-sex marriage as a moral mandate required by justice.

Given the venerable status of marriage and its universally established heterosexual character — at least until very recently — the burden of argument falls on the need to explain how such a movement for a moral revolution gained credibility, cultural mass, and momentum. How did this happen?

A culture does not consist only of ideas and ideologies, but no culture exists without them. Given the complexity of any culture, a comprehensive map of these ideas, moral intuitions, and philosophies is impossible to create. Nevertheless, some patterns are clear enough. We can trace the acceptance of same-sex marriage to at least three major ideas that have been shaping the modern mind for some time — and are held to some extent by both social liberals and conservatives.

A Progressivist Understanding of History

One of the ideological engines of our social revolution is the idea that history reveals a progressive liberation of peoples who have suffered oppression. In this view of history, one prejudice after another has fallen as we have come to terms with the demands of justice. In the words of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., “The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.”

In other words, history reveals an inevitable, though tortuously long, arc toward justice and fairness. Over the course of history, innumerable superstitions and prejudices have been discarded. Slavery, once considered a social and economic necessity on both sides of the Atlantic, was overcome in Western democracies. Women demanded and were granted the right to vote. The world of Jim Crow gave way to the world of racial integration and civil rights. The mentally disabled are no longer put away in asylums. The Irish and Italians, once oppressed as the unwashed and unwanted immigrants of the Gilded Age, have risen to prominence in every arena of American life. America has elected its first African-American President. History marches on.

For obvious reasons, the movement to normalize homosexuality attached itself to this idea of historical progress. This was a natural and inevitable development, and those who formed the strategy for this movement used the most powerful tools at their disposal. The progressivist vision of history was there for the taking, and the gay rights movement took it up with enthusiasm.

Americans are naturally drawn to this understanding of history. It plays to our belief that our generation is in some way morally superior to the generations who preceded us. Liberals feast on this understanding of history and make it their main argument in any number of debates. But conservatives are shaped by this narrative as well. Conservatives accept the undeniable fact that history, both long and short, tells a story that we should celebrate at countless turns.

But the problem with the progressivist understanding of history is that it cannot stand alone. It cannot be the only narrative. There has to be some means of identifying what is truly a manifestation of oppression and what is a structure necessary for human flourishing. If the only story we have is the narrative of liberation from oppression, then, as Karl Marx understood, all that remains is an unstoppable revolution that dissolves all bonds of relationship, kinship, tradition, and moral order. Should children be liberated from the authority of their parents? Should all prisoners be liberated from their cells? Should human beings be liberated from the obligations of family and kinship?

The progressivist understanding of history must be checked by a recognition that liberation from oppression is not the only true and compelling narrative. The affirmation and preservation of moral obligations and commitments must be the companion narrative. But, in order to understand why so many among us see something as morally revolutionary and socially subversive as same-sex marriage to be something to demand and champion, consider the fact that many of our friends and neighbors see same-sex marriage as only the next logical step in overcoming prejudice and discrimination. It is the only story they know, and it is powerful.

A Radical Individualism

Paired with the progressivist understanding of history is a vision of individualism that is virtually unprecedented in human experience. An affirmation of the importance of the individual is written into the fabric of modern thought. Our understanding of human rights, of individual liberty, and of personal responsibility are central to the American self-consciousness. Add to this the fact that the rise of the therapeutic worldview has recast human experience as a continuous project of individual self-discovery and self-definition.

But, if individualism was central to the American experience from the beginning, the current form of this idea is far more radical than previous generations could imagine. The current form of individualism includes the claim that we can define ourselves even in terms of gender and sex. This individualism is titanic in its reach, producing what psychiatrist Robert Jay Lifton once described as the “Protean Man.” We demand the total right to define ourselves.

Once again, we must recognize that the opponents of same-sex marriage have also been drinking heavily at the springs that feed this powerful idea. Many conservatives have bought into their own form of expressive individualism, taking refuge in the structures of social order only when convenient, bending moral codes to our own individualistic demands, forfeiting moral obligations when they conflict with our favorite project — ourselves.

The control on the destructive force of expressive individualism is the reality of moral obligation and the goodness of true self-knowledge. As Christians know — and must always remember — we are known before we ever emerge to know. Our Creator knew us before we even came to be, and he established our identity before we came to know ourselves. True happiness can come only by embracing with gratitude the identity we are given by the Creator. This idea — now reaching even to sex and gender — is anathema to the modern mind.

The Claim of Moral Autonomy

Throughout most of human history, moral principles were considered to be objectively true and inviolate. The universe was understood to be ruled by a moral law established by a divine Lawgiver and Judge. That understanding has given way to the belief that most, if not all, moral principles are the products of social construction — we make them up as we go along.

While most criticisms of moral relativism are directed at individual conduct, on the larger scale, the entire society is increasingly convinced that moral principles must give way to new understandings, findings, and insights. When this idea is added to the progressivist understanding of history and the radical form of modern individualism, we have a recipe for moral revolution.

And, as with the other ideological factors we have considered, this one is also affirmed, to some degree, by both liberals and conservatives. There can be no doubt that some understandings of moral principle were indeed shaped by prejudice and ignorance, leading to great human suffering. Laws against interracial marriage were prime examples of this prejudice, and there are many others. Fear of minorities, including homosexuals, has led to scapegoating and hatred, cloaked in the language of moral rectitude. These things must give way to moral progress and be denounced with moral fervor.

But, once again, not all moral principles are examples of oppression. To the contrary, human life is only possible within the context of enduring moral laws and principles that liberate all human beings to their true humanity. This is where those who support same-sex marriage and those who oppose it face each other across a huge gulf of understanding. One side sees a moral mandate to liberate marriage from its heterosexual limitation. The other side sees natural marriage as a liberating, God-given institution for human flourishing. There is precious little shared ground in this debate.

Same-sex marriage is not an idea that emerged from a vacuum. The project of normalizing homosexuality has deep roots and ideological momentum. The elites, the entertainment culture, the news media, and the educational establishment celebrate all three of these ideas as central to the modern experience and as ideological propulsion into a better future.

So, when we wonder how it came to be that so many among us now favor same-sex marriage, we must remember that, to some extent or another, virtually all of us have embraced the ideas that make such a moral revolution thinkable. And ideas, as Richard Weaver famously reminded us, have consequences.

I am always glad to hear from readers. Write me at mail@albertmohler.com. Follow regular updates on Twitter at www.twitter.com/AlbertMohler.

There is no way to say everything that needs to be said about an issue such as this in a single essay of any length. For more on this subject, please use the search feature at this website. I have written more than 200 articles on the issue of homosexuality. Most are available here.

Related Posts In Defense of Marriage–President Bush Makes the Case What Makes Abortion Plausible? What Makes Abortion Unthinkable?, Part One What Makes Abortion Plausible? What Makes Abortion Unthinkable?, Part Two What Makes Abortion Plausible? What Makes Abortion Unthinkable?, Part Three Tutoring for Toddlers? A Call for Common Sense Read more at www.albertmohler.com

 

See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/bs9l1

Amplify’d from gawker.com

Jaycee Dugard Kidnappers Give Full Confessions

Max Read — Phillip and Nancy Garrido, the California couple accused of kidnapping an 11-year-old girl and imprisoning her in their backyard for 18 years, have both given full confessions, according to Nancy's defense lawyer Stephen Tapson. Not only that, but apparently Jaycee Dugard—their victim—was in the room with Nancy for at least one questioning session, which is, according to the AP, "the first time the women had been face-to-face since the couple was arrested in 2009." The Garridos' lawyers are negotiating possible plea deals for their clients—prosecutors are hoping for 440 years to life for Phillip and and 241 to life for Nancy. [AP] Read more at gawker.com

 

See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/crjd

All Books Must Now Appeal to Cracker Barrel Patrons

Amplify’d from gawker.com

All Books Must Now Appeal to Cracker Barrel Patrons

Hamilton Nolan — Now that Borders is dying, book publishers are collectively asking themselves, "Huh, where do we sell all these stupid books, now?" I mean Barnes & Noble is okay and all, but it's gonna take more shelf space than that to show off all those fancy attractive book covers designed to make people forget they could be buying this copy much cheaper used, on Ebay. The solution? Placing books in every kind of store, anywhere, that sells anything at all.

A wide range of stores better known for their apparel, food and fishing reels have been adding books. The fashion designer Marc Jacobs opened Bookmarc in Manhattan in the fall. Anthropologie has increased the number of titles it carries to 125, up from 25 in 2003. Coldwater Creek, Lowe's, Bass Pro Shops and even Cracker Barrel are adding new books.

As long as you write about fashion, home improvement, fishing, or biscuits 'n gravy, you have a future in this business!

[NYT. Photo of typical American book buyer via Sam Pullara/Flickr] Read more at gawker.com

 

See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/crjd

Amplify’d from www.npr.org

Driver Plows Through Pack Of Cyclists, Claims Self-Defense

by Bill Chappell

Brazilian police are questioning a man who drove his car through a crowd of dozens of bicyclists, injuring at least 16 riders who were taking part in a group ride to raise awareness of cyclists on city streets.

The driver of a black Volkswagen accelerated as he drove through the center of a pack of riders in the monthly Critical Mass bike ride Friday evening, in the southern city of Porto Alegre. More than 100 riders are believed to have been participating in the event.

Several participants and bystanders recorded the incident, in videos that have now made their way online. The graphic footage shows people being tossed aside, even as some riders lay across the hood of the car after being struck.

According to the blog The Urban Country, the driver, identified in several reports as Ricardo Neis, 47, told police Monday that he had acted in self defense.

Here's a video of the incident currently on YouTube — and a WARNING: it's a graphic, closeup view of an event going from peaceful to tragic in mere seconds, around the :50 mark:

Neis reportedly had his son, 15, in the car with him when he sped through the crowd of cyclists. Moments after their car ran through the pack of riders, the pair abandoned the vehicle.

On Monday, Neis, who works at a bank, and his son said that cyclists had begun hitting their car, a VW Golf, according to Zero Hora.

Five cyclists who were hit by the car disputed that claim when they spoke with police early Monday, saying they were only calling for calm on the street.

And Zero Hora reports that one rider said that it was actually fortunate that it rained on the day of the ride.

Eduardo Fernandez Iglesias, who required stitches in his head after being struck, said that if the weather had been better, more children — like his own daughter, 9 — would have come along for the ride, as well.

The incident has sparked outrage among activists and riders, who say that events like Critical Mass are meant to show that cyclists don't need a special dispensation from traffic officials to use the streets.

In recent years, there have been other conflicts between cyclists and motorists at Critical Mass events. Some of them are compiled on their own Wiki page. Read more at www.npr.org

 

See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/bs9ck

Disney World Is Extra Rapey Lately

Amplify’d from gawker.com

Disney World Is Extra Rapey Lately

Hamilton Nolan — Are you caught up on the most recent sex crimes somehow connected to Disney World? Well, you should be. First there was Disney reservations clerk Wilbert Brookins, arrested last week for trying to rape a woman in her Disney hotel room after he'd gotten her an "employee discount" and escorted her through the park. Although she was very specific: "she said at the time she would not exchange sex for this."

The next day, Edgar Arnold, who works as an electrician at Disney World, was arrested in nearby Haines City while "sitting in a green Jeep Liberty watching pornographic videos" and masturbating.

The week before, there was also a horrific sexual assault at Sea World. You can't blame Disney for that. You can blame Orlando, though. That place is hell.

[Photo via] Read more at gawker.com

 

See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/crjd

Amplify’d from www.americamagazine.org

Laity Near the Top?

The Editors

W hile the pontificate of Pope Benedict XVI has certainly enjoyed major successes, like the pope’s visit last fall to England to beatify Cardinal Newman, the crises that have led to empty pews in the Catholic parishes of England, Europe and the United States persist.

The fundamental criticism of the institutional church is that its clerical, all-male establishment has not made room for other voices. There is no need to list the number of recent policy decisions, from Rome to home, which would have been more prudent if only a variety of laypersons had been consulted.

Jesus told his disciples that they were servants, that they were to feed the hungry and share their wealth with the poor and that they should demonstrate their love for one another by offering their lives in service. Some in church leadership have done the opposite, creating a culture of clericalism that too often values loyalty over accountability. In these circumstances, a project of reform is essential to rejuvenate church leadership and give greater voice to the whole church. As Pope John Paul II wrote in “Novo Millennio Ineunte,” quoting St. Paulinus of Nola: “Let us listen to what all the faithful say, because in every one of them the Spirit of God breathes” (No. 45).

How to begin? No one should anticipate changes in the existing discipline on celibacy or in the teaching on women’s ordination, but there are other ways to reform church structures to allow women and married men to participate in church governance. One proposal is simply to change canon law to admit laypeople to the College of Cardinals. The church could thereby continue its all-male priesthood, yet transform the “men’s club” into a church with a face that more resembles the people of God described in the documents of the Second Vatican Council.

A more realistic proposal, however, would entail two steps: First, reorganize diocesan offices so that laypeople constitute at least half of the bishop’s principal advisers. (Increasing numbers of laity have already been hired as staff in many U.S. dioceses.) Second, create a new body, an international council of laypersons to share functions with the College of Cardinals. After attrition among the cardinals, each of the two bodies eventually could have 100 members. The lay members would be Catholics who love the church and are recognized for sound Christian judgment. They would come from a variety of occupations—education, health, religious life, law, the arts, business, science, government and labor. Church leadership would not be limited to elderly men but would be expanded to include men and women, married and unmarried, of different ages. Wisdom, after all, can be found from a multitude of sources, something that St. Benedict acknowledged when he urged an abbot at a monastery to solicit the opinion of even the youngest member of the community: “By the Lord’s inspiration, it is often a younger person who knows what is best.”

Some members of the council would direct Vatican offices; others would come to Rome for regular consultation. Membership could be proportionate to the Catholic populations throughout the world, chosen for a specified term on the recommendation of grass-roots representative caucuses of clergy and laity. The combined college and council would share three functions: administer the Vatican offices, advise the pope and select his successor.

These laypeople would offer much-needed perspective on the impact of the teachings and practices of the church, including such divisive subjects as contraception, the role of women in the church, the treatment of homosexuals and the failure of authorities to respond quickly and forcefully to the scandal of sexual abuse by members of the clergy. They would understand other pastoral failings, like the denial of the Eucharist to public persons because of their political positions, a too modest peace and justice agenda, lackluster liturgies with unprepared sermons and insensitive celebrants.

One may object that this initiative is a “pie in the sky” idea that the clerical establishment would never accept. Perhaps. Yet the implementation of specific alternatives like a lay council need not threaten the current leadership. For the authority of the church “is exercised in the service of truth and charity” (“Ut Unum Sint,” No. 3). Nor would a council undermine the pope’s authority. As Pope John Paul II wrote of the papacy: “The authority proper to this ministry is completely at the service of God’s merciful plan and it must always be seen in this perspective” (No. 92). Discerning that plan is a task that Catholics should take on together.

Following Pope John Paul’s example, we encourage our readers, clergy and lay, to evaluate this proposal and suggest other reforms that would achieve the same goals. The church has survived these 2,000 years because at key moments it chose the path of renewal. It may be that another such moment has arrived. Read more at www.americamagazine.org

 

See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/bs93p