Duck Dodging

   I have never seen an episode of Duck Dynasty, but I have many parishioners who do.  I'm as aware of the show, its characters, and its premise, as I am about most things that have become pop culture phenomena.  I understand the reason why people like the show and the Robertson family members, which leads me to a few thoughts on the whole Phil Robertson controversy over his comments in an interview with GQ condemning homosexual acts.

   I think Phil Robertson gave a forthright, honest answer to a direct question about homosexuality.  I comprehend why A&E network has a concern over the public image of the star of its highest-rated program.  A&E - a network that first shot to prominence with the series Queer Eye for the Straight Guy - doesn't want to be mixed up with a guy who has made comments about homosexuality with which many in the country disagree.

   Here's what I don't understand:  Does A&E not know why Duck Dynasty is popular, and who its audience is?  Are they truly surprised to discover that the star of their reality TV show is a real person and not just a character, and that person has actual views on controversial issues?  Seriously, what did they think Phil Robertson would say in answer to that GQ question other than what he said?

   If A&E was so concerned about the network's image and that of Phil Robertson, they ought to have had their PR people oversee the interview and vet the questions.  I don't even watch the show, and I could have told you with a great deal of accuracy how someone like Phil Robertson would respond to a question about homosexuality.  I think A&E looks foolish to get their knickers in a twist and punish the man for an outcome they ought to have foreseen themselves.  The hypocrisy of A&E is astonishing; with one hand they rake in money by promoting a show that appeals to a socially conservative audience, while with the other hand they punish the star of the show for holding and voicing a socially conservative opinion.  So much for reality television.

   Moreover, Phil Robertson got it right in his response to both the question and the controversy that followed.  He wasn't "hating" on anyone, but condemning homosexual acts (the act, not the person, mind you).  In so doing, he's entirely in line with Scriptural teaching and natural law.  In his own rather rustic, simple parlance he was expressing the teaching of the Theology of the Body.  Of course there are people who disagree vehemently with Robertson's stance, just as they disagree with orthodox Christian views on sexuality.  In the Hollywood playbook, popular cultural icons like Phil Robertson need to be buried and deprived of any platform or attention.  We wouldn't want average Americans thinking that it's OK to express conservative Christian views about sexuality and get away with it.  That's how the gay rights agenda has progressed so far so rapidly; they succeeded in creating the illusion that no common-sense person could possibly oppose gay sexual relationships or same-sex marriage.  And then... gasp! .... someone respected for their down-to-earth, common-sense approach to life comes out unequivocally against homosexual activity.  Off with his head!  Set an example that expressing this opinion will be punished!

Sigh.  I remember when A&E did fine arts programming most people found boring.  I miss that.

As Good As It Gets

   When I heard that Representative Paul Ryan and Senator Patty Murray had managed to hammer out a federal budget framework for the next two years, I felt like stepping out on the balcony and announcing, "Habemus placitum!"  ("We have an agreement!")  Except I don't have a balcony and nothing in the budget agreement is really anything to get excited about in itself.  Even if I had a balcony, I'd probably only see a few startled students look up as they hustled to take their final exams this week.


   It's perhaps a good sign that nobody in Congress is happy about the Ryan-Murray budget agreement.  Conservatives are grumbling that it doesn't do enough to reduce spending immediately, and liberals are bemoaning the fact that there isn't more spending.  This is nothing new.  The two parties view the question of the federal budget from different ideological stances; there would be something extremely suspect about anyone in Congress being able to say, "I'm perfectly satisfied with this budget and I get everything I want."  Looking at the framework, I would say it's a grown-up compromise.  There are no big wins or big losses in the bill.

   The budget agreement as a framework for the actual budget to be written, if all passes, will do something very important, and I hope the Tea Party enthusiasts will take note:  at long last, after years of continuing resolutions that pretty much let the executive branch spend at will, the budget decisions will return where they constitutionally ought to be, in the Congress.  That is something to shout about.  The Ryan-Murray plan is the first crucial step back toward fiscal sanity and the federal budget working the way it's supposed to.  That's nothing to sneeze at in Washington these days.

   I greatly sympathize with Tea Party aims, but we also need to be realistic.  I liked Paul Ryan's budget in 2011, and I liked his budget in 2012.  They were fiscally conservative and sensible.  But they went nowhere in a Democratically controlled Senate.  If we want to avoid the specter of periodic shutdowns and budget battles that end in continuing resolutions, Congress needs to accept the fact of divided government and compromise so as to fulfill its responsibilities to the American people.  Going over the cliff with ideological flags flying is just plain stupid.  If fiscal conservatives want to see a fiscally conservative budget, they will first have to demonstrate that they can govern responsibly and without tantrums.  That's how you give people the assurance to vote for you, and that's how you get a future budget that achieves more of your aims.  With the Affordable Care Act casting Mordor-like clouds of doom over Democrats in the mid-term elections next year, don't give voters a reason to think that Republicans would be just as incapable of governing sensibly if they had the majority.

   I hope the Ryan-Murray plan passes the Senate, as it has with enormous support in the House.  It's not perfect, it is playing small ball.  But it will give us the first proper federal budget we've had in years, and returns to Congress the constitutional responsibility it ought to be fulfilling.  It may be as good as it gets for now, but I'll settle for that over a government in perpetual crisis.

Celebrating St. Nicholas Day

   As I mentioned in my last blog post concerning Advent, the celebration of St. Nicholas Day on December 6 was always a big part of my childhood.  Indeed, my family still celebrates it, even though we're all grown.  Growing up in heavily Catholic northeastern Wisconsin with its north European immigrant roots, St. Nicholas' feast day was almost universally observed.  When we moved to another state, I was shocked to discover that there were people who didn't celebrate the day.  I still delight each year in telling children that people who tell them Santa Claus doesn't exist don't know what they're talking about.  One year I even whipped out the Roman missal at the Christmas vigil Mass to show the kids the propers for St. Nicholas' feast day.

   For anyone who doesn't know the whole story of St. Nicholas, Bishop of Myra, I highly recommend Bill Bennett's book, The True St. Nicholas, and Why He Matters to Christmas.  It's tremendously helpful not only in understanding why the veneration of this saint is something to cultivate, but it also aids in navigating the thorny issue of Santa Claus' proper relationship to the celebration of Christ's birth.  The secular cult of the Claus needs some competition from the true St. Nicholas, a holy bishop renowned for his charity, concern for the welfare of children, and also for sticking up for Christian orthodoxy at the Council of Nicaea in 325 A.D.  (OK, so it's true that he struck the heretic Arius, but I'm not going to judge him too harshly.  Arius had it coming.)

   A Happy St. Nicholas Day to everyone!  Fill a stocking or shoe with candy, fruit and nuts, be kind to children, and pray your Nicene Creed.  But it might be best not to punch any heretics.