Two Promising Catholic Podcasts

I found a couple of podcasts this weekend that are promising. Production values for both are good and both are orthodox and entertaining. The first is the "Pray-as-you-go" podcast produced by a community of British Jesuits. From the Ekklesia website:

"A new initiative by the British Jesuits - a religious order of the Catholic church - to offer commuters daily prayer sessions in MP3 format, as free downloads from the internet, has proved an instant success around the world. Jesuit Media Initiatives planned to trial the new project – called ‘Pray-As-You-Go’ - for the season of Lent. They invited people from their parishes and schools in Britain to give it a go by using the audio files on their iPods, mobile phones or other MP3 players to guide them through prayer on their daily journey to work, school or college. But by the time dawn broke on the first day - Ash Wednesday (1 March) - word had spread, and some 3,300 prayer sessions had been downloaded from the web in countries as far apart as Australia, Mexico and the United States..."

The second podcast is "TWICC" or "This Week in the Catholic Church" produced by Fr. Roderick of "Catholic Insider" fame. His logo adorns the top of this post. He and several other Catholic podcasters are cooperating to produce a kind of newsmagazine laced with humor and banter. The first episode was released last week and I enjoyed it thoroughly. I'm definitely looking forward to next week's installment.

Both can be subscribed to via iTunes as well as other content aggregators like Yahoo Podcasts.

Teddy Kennedy, Glass Houses, and Throwing Stones

Is Ted Kennedy the right person to be criticizing the character of his ideological opponents?

"...This so-called Federal Marriage Amendment should really be called the Republican Right Wing 2006 Electoral Strategy Amendment because it is more about rallying an extreme base to vote than about solving a problem. Proponents use fear tactics and claim that marriage is under attack by activist judges ... A vote for this amendment is a vote for bigotry - pure and simple."

Wouldn't it be better for everyone if he were to instead say that "I respectfully disagree with the sentiments motivating the citizens who support this bill. Most of them are honorable people with honorable intentions and I hope to persuade them in the coming weeks that they are wrong and why."