Happy With Ratzinger! (No, Really!)

WorldNetDaily: Pope: So, you're not Catholic? Then you're not in true Church

2007-07-11T05:29:00.000-07:00

Ok, so? What's the problem here? This is news? I know that there has been alot of heretical thinking out there but has everyone been asleep for the last 40 years too? I don't think that I have ever heard anyone who was credible in the Church say that other "churches" were on an equal footing with the Catholic Church and that includes the Eastern Orthodox and the Protestants. Sorry to burst their bubbles, but they did it to themselves when they scampered across the Tiber to do their own thing. They voluntarily gave up parts of the whole Truth which is still contained in the Catholic Church. Gosh! What did you expect the Pope to say? If they had asked me I would have told them to "GROW UP!"

It's just starting folks. Benedict XVI is an orthodox Catholic and they will never forgive him for releasing the Traditional Mass. They will beat him like a rented mule every chance they get. And if they don't get a chance, they'll beat him up anyway.

WorldNetDaily: Pope: So, you're not Catholic? Then you're not in true Church

The True Defenders of the Faith

2007-06-12T11:09:00.000-07:00

Just want to make a few comments and then I urge you to read the story at the post below from California Catholic Daily.

It is these types of people who are the real heroes of the Church. The defenders of the Faith. Don't look to your bishops and priests for role models. For although there are a few shining examples in the episcopacy of true moral fortitude, these examples only go to prove that they are the exception and not the rule. It is the everyday people, the ones that live their lives and then without help, without gratitude, they pick up their sword and shield and do battle against the giants of the Culture of Death. Unfortunately, as the story below illustrates, they even carry on in the face of opposition from their local churches.

California Catholic Daily - Saturday, June 2, 2007 -- Protest at Our Lady of Guadalupe parish, San Diego

'I would rather go to hell than take orders on how to vote from the Cardinal.'--Australian lawmaker

2007-06-11T11:20:00.000-07:00

Well, at least the Aussies are honest! Too bad our own "Catholic" politicians are not as up-front in their views as are their Down-under (no pun intended) brethren. It would certainly simplify things if we could get over that whole "personal beliefs vs. public duty" crapola that we hear every time a pro-abortion, pro-death "Catholic" pol opens their mouths. Maybe if they did and stopped trying to convince us that they are our friends we could get into a moral "death-cage match" with them and maybe, just maybe, hash-out some of these moral dilemmas that we face.

'I would rather go to hell than take orders on how to vote from the Cardinal.'--Australian lawmaker

Archbishop Chaput: Immigration proposal merits support

2007-06-06T13:22:00.000-07:00

Denver, May 31, 2007 / 11:07 am (CNA).- Archbishop Charles Chaput of Denver is calling for support for the current Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2007 (S. 1348). The bill is currently in debate in the U.S. Senate. The debate is expected to continue into early June.

Leaders from both political parties have taken the right course in advancing the bill, said the archbishop. The bill is not ideal, he said, but it does push a vital reform process forward.

Normally I support Archbishop Chaput on the issues that he chooses to espouse. His stands on pro-life issues are particularly strong. However, on the issue of Illegal Immigration, he and I must respectfully part ways. I do commend him on the courage he showed in admitting that: "Americans are right to worry about public security, jobs, respect for the law, and the solvency of public institutions." But to that short list he should add: the concern for the crushing financial burden that we will be placing on ourselves and on our children as well as the artificial suppression of wages that we can continue to expect due to a massive influx of low and unskilled labor.

I was also pleased that the Archbishop recognized: “People who seek justice for immigrants sometimes downplay these worries, or write them off as veiled prejudice. This is a mistake. These are legitimate concerns and proper areas for debate. But they need to be weighed in light of other legitimate concerns."

I still have not heard an adequate explanation of why we must, as a people, receive and indeed embrace millions of people who knowingly committed a crime by entering this country illegally. What possible moral justification can there be for admitting millions of gate-crashers who don't even have the intent of assimilating into the culture of this country? Instead their intent is to live off the bounty of the land while remaining part of their home culture and country.

Perhaps if Archbishop Chaput and the rest of the "open borders" crowd were to wake up one morning to find a family of illegal aliens on their doorstep demanding to be allowed to reside in their homes indefinitely, perhaps then they would understand the genuine concerns of the majority of legal people in the United States. When these same "open borders" people asked for the authorities to remove the unwanted and uninvited "guests" in their homes and were called "bigoted" for their trouble, then perhaps they would better understand. But somehow I don't think they would ever let them over their doorsteps in the first place.

The Archbishop continued with this statement: “While areas of the proposed legislation do arguably need improvement, Senate bill 1348 Immigration reform needs to happen this year, since no one will be eager to handle it in an election year, We can no longer wait to address this pressing issue. Delaying a solution will only lead to more enforcement raids, bitter debate, confusion and resentment.”

Archbishop Chaput, if you want to see "bitter debate, confusion and resentment", then just wait until this bill is passed and the law-abiding citizens of this country will wonder why they should have been law-abiding in the first place when lawlessness is rewarded so handsomely.

The full text of the Archbishop’s press release is available at, http://www.archden.org/

Archbishop Chaput: Immigration proposal merits support

Sweden Allows “Saviour Siblings” for Tissue Transplants

2007-05-31T13:10:00.000-07:00

This is one of those stories that makes me feel that I am living in the middle of a science fiction novel. Really scary stuff going on here. Even if the process did not go any further than the harvesting of stem cells (which of course, it won't), it is extremely unnerving to imagine children artificially created for medical purposes. Doesn't that strike anyone else as sick and twisted?

Five years tops. That's how long I bet it will take for someone to take the next logical step: grow children to harvest their organs for transplant.

Sweden Allows “Saviour Siblings” for Tissue Transplants

St. Louis Prelate Aims to Bring Flock in Line - washingtonpost.com

2007-05-31T10:55:00.000-07:00

Well, they're attacking Archbishop Burke again. This time it is the Washington Post. Why is the Post doing a hit piece on Burke? I don't know. One thing that I do know is that Archbishop Burke had better get used to this kind of thing. Once you stand up for the truth in this day and age, you are asking for a bloody nose from every left-wing, humanist, socialist who can operate a keyboard.

St. Louis Prelate Aims to Bring Flock in Line - washingtonpost.com

"Go Ahead, Make My Day": Kissling Dares Catholic Hierarchy to Excommunicate Her for Abortion Advocacy

2007-05-25T12:40:00.000-07:00

Francis Kissling is a washed-up, has-been, sad little creature who's only concerns in this life have boiled down to: killing children, gaining some cheap notoriety, and giving the Pope the "finger". If she has, as she claims, found a priest who can stomach presenting Our Lord and Savior to her on a regular basis as if He is only a "Jesus Cookie", then that proves only one thing: there are at least two morally deficient members of the Catholic Church who desperately need booting.

Regrettably she does make a valid point in that there are very few in a position to do anything that will take action on behalf of the Church and Her faithful. However, I disagree with her that per Cannon Law, nothing can be done, and after all, formal excommunication is not required. Just withhold the Sacraments and severely discipline any "priest" who aids her in her open heresy. Whoa! Was that a pig I just saw flying past my window?

Well, Francis my dear, laugh whist you can. The day of Judgment draws near. You can make all the technical excuses that you want now, but they will avail you little in the final reckoning and even history will judge you harshly after the current madness has passed. This is one that only God Himself can save.

Kissling Dares Catholic Hierarchy to Excommunicate Her for Abortion Advocacy

Think Well on this Quote

2007-05-25T11:35:00.000-07:00

"The world is a dangerous place not because of those who do evil, but because of those who look on and do nothing." ~ Albert Einstein

Pro-Abortion Nancy Pelosi Delivers Commencement Address at Catholic U of San Francisco

2007-05-24T06:43:00.000-07:00

Pro-Abortion Nancy Pelosi Delivers Commencement Address at Catholic U of San Francisco

SAN FRANCISCO, May 22, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) – This past Saturday, May 19, Speaker of the House and intense pro-abortion advocate Nancy Pelosi delivered the commencement address at the Jesuit Catholic University of San Francisco.

Her address was delivered before the graduates in St. Ignatius Church. Pelosi opened by thanking USF President Rev. Stephen Privett, and then went on to quote Pope Paul VI who said, "If you want peace, work for justice.''

She also praised former Californian Lieutenant Governor Leo McCarthy at length, and touched on the issue of immigration, voicing her concerns about the immigration bill that is now before the Senate.

While Pelosi’s address was typical commencement fare, faithful Catholics consider her leading role at the Catholic University commencement to be a lamentable occurrence.

I'll say. Now, nobody can tell me that the leaders of this "Catholic" university was not aware of Ms. Pelosi's rabidly pro-abortion politics, notwithstanding her recent election makeover as the kindly Catholic Grandma. If the powers-that-be at JCUS cared a whit about Catholic morals, then surly one of them would have said "Gee Father, maybe Nancy ain't the best choice we could make."

But isn't that the real problem? We all know Nancy's views on abortion and everything else that the Socialists espouse. What is so troubling to me is that our supposedly moral and educational leaders are patting people on the back and telling them how great they are. Turning a blind eye to the situation would be a step up for these people.

With a history of support for Pelosi, University officials declined to comment.

Big surprise there!

Archbishop George Niederauer of San Francisco also received an honorary degree during the commencement ceremony for his “extraordinary sense of social justice, a passionate concern for peace, and a commitment to nonviolence to achieve ethical goals.”

CNS had asked Archbishop Niederauer to boycott the ceremony if the university failed to cancel plans to honor known abortion supporters. The archbishop has twice participated in honoring McCarthy. He joined with Catholic Charities CYO of San Francisco in honoring McCarthy in April, and in February joined Fr. Privett and others at the altar for McCarthy’s funeral Mass, according to a report in the California Catholic Daily.

It is a sad state of affairs when an archbishop cannot turn down an honorary degree in order to help save the lives of innocent children murdered daily. If you're going to sell-out, do it for something like money or power. Selling-out for an honorary degree is so trivial as to be insulting, but then again, what's one more sell-out? God help us.

From: Orthometer: Fever Induced Dreams

2007-05-23T06:16:00.000-07:00

As a fan of the Clint Eastwood of Yore, I have to say that this is one of the funniest posts that I have seen in a long time. Thanks to Fr. Erik Richtsteig at Orthometer for the holy chuckle. Visit his blog at the following link.

Orthometer: Fever induced dreams

Think Well on this Quote

2007-05-22T11:14:00.001-07:00

"At what point, then, is the approach of danger to be expected?

"I answer, if it ever reach us, it must spring up amongst us. It cannot come from abroad. If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen, we must live through all time, or die by suicide." ~ Abraham Lincoln

18 House Democrats Blast Pope for Dropping the “E-word” on Abortion

2007-05-17T11:36:00.000-07:00

18 House Democrats Blast Pope for Dropping the “E-word” on Abortion: "WASHINGTON, D.C., May 15, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) – A group of 18 House Democrats led by Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) blasted Pope Benedict XVI yesterday for supporting the idea that Church leaders could excommunicate politicians or deny them communion for supporting legalized abortion."

Hello! Earth calling! What are you guys, a bunch of morons? Sorry to be so blunt but sometimes events turn so weird and twisted that I can't believe it. Stories like this one are why "Mad Magazine" finally went belly-up. Every time the writers at "Mad" tried to write a parody piece they realized that they were just writing tomorrow's news headlines!

Of course the leaders of the Church can excommunicate you for publicly supporting abortion. I got news for these people: they've already excommunicated themselves, the pope doesn't have to do it. They just don't have the integrity to leave the Church on their own steam and become what they already are: Episcopalians. That's why we need to help them find the door until, and so that, they come to their senses.

The Lair of the Catholic Cavemen

2007-05-17T07:48:00.000-07:00

Hat tip to the Caveman. Thanks for the cartoon. Would be even more funny if it wasn't all too often sadly true.

The Lair of the Catholic Cavemen

Catholic World Report - The Pelosi Problem

2007-05-17T05:58:00.000-07:00

Here is a link to an article well worth reading that may not be getting much circulation. Explores the abortion/Catholic politicians/bishops problem in a concise but brief way.

Catholic World Report - The Pelosi Problem

Rudy Giuliani: The Republican John Kerry

2007-05-16T11:55:00.000-07:00

The more that I hear about Rudy Giuliani, the less that I like him. The old: "I'm personally opposed to abortion but can't force my religious beliefs on the American people" routine is wearing rather thin. It turned out to be a sucker's bet in the last presidential election as John Kerry attempted to turn that sow's ear into a silk purse with the same argument. What makes Rudy believe that he can attract any more pro-life voters than John Kerry did with this morally bankrupt philosophy? And how can he win a general election without the full support of the pro-life community? I doubt that he will be able to draw off a usable percentage of Hillary's abortion supporters who would certainly see their interests better served in even the worst Democratic administration over even the best Republican administration.

As for a candidate's moral compass: why else would you vote for someone? Don't we send people to elected office because we are trusting them to make good moral judgements on our behalf, at least on what we think is a moral good? So basically, what Rudy Giuliani and John Kerry before him are saying is this, only diabetically sugar-coated: Screw the Pope. Screw the teachings of the Church. We've found a personal pastor who is more interested in our membership in his church and in our finances and prestige than he is in saving souls. We shall not serve any religion or moral code other than one of our own making.

I think that I would rather vote for a faithful Evangelical or Mormon before I would vote for a bad Catholic. Although I don't agree with all of their views as pertains to religion, at least I can hope that they will be as faithful to our country as they are to their religion.

Giuliani says he will not challenge Pope on abortion-Communion

Washington DC, May 15, 2007 / 12:50 pm (CNA).- Rudy Giuliani refused to challenge Pope Benedict XVI, who said last week that Catholic politicians who favor abortion have excommunicated themselves and should not take Communion.

The former mayor of New York is pro-abortion and said his differences with the Catholic Church are between him, God and his confessor, not the Pope. Giuliani is running for the leadership of the Republican Party.

"I don't get into debates with the Pope," Giuliani told reporters. "Issues like that for me are between me and my confessor. ... I'm a Catholic and that's the way I resolve those issues, personally and privately.

Giuliani resorted to the common false idea that there can be a split between what one believes in public and what one legislates for the sake of the common good. "That's what religion is all about — it's something that's between you and your conscience and God and then whoever your spiritual advisers are," he was quoted as saying.

The Giuliani campaign Wednesday night deflected questions about Giuliani's spiritual advisers and whether he takes Communion, saying that those are private issues.

Mega-Church Pastor Rick Warren Under Fire over Media Mogul Parishioner's Porn Channels

2007-05-15T14:16:00.000-07:00

Although this is not a Catholic issue per se, it is a Christian issue and although Pastor Rick Warren is not a Catholic priest, he very likely has direct counterparts within the Catholic Church.

I won't give Pastor Warren a hard time over this...yet. And by that I mean that the man should be given an appropriate amount of time in order to make the right decision, a decision which I am sure he already knows that he should make but which will be a powerfully hard road for him to travel. Money is the root of all evil, at least when large amounts of it are to be had and there are few men with more of the vile stuff to throw around than Rupert Murdoch.

If Pastor Warren makes the right decision, he will have a heart-to-heart talk with Mr. Murdoch. If Mr. Murdoch does not then divest himself of the pornography empire that he has been building over the years, then Pastor Warren should, in good conscience, demand that Mr. Murdoch leave his church and take his tainted contributions with him. Will that happen if it comes to that? I would like to think that it would but the skeptic in me thinks that some kind of excuse will be made for Mr. Murdoch so that he can continue to attend Pastor Warren's church and continue to donate those juicy tithes. I will be waiting to hear the outcome.

Mega-Church Pastor Rick Warren Under Fire over Media Mogul Parishioner's Porn Channels

Hands Off Our Ovaries!

2007-05-14T10:40:00.000-07:00

"In the last year alone, two women who have undergone egg extraction in the United Kingdom have died after developing severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS), which causes rapid accumulation of fluid in the abdomen, chest, and around the heart. Symptoms include severe pelvic pain, nausea, vomiting, weight gain, ovarian enlargement, respiratory problems, blood clots and liver dysfunction," says Cook, who is operations assistant for Concerned Women for America and a graduate of Notre Dame University.

Opponents argue that if egg harvesting becomes widely used for the purposes of stem- cell research and therapeutic cloning, the number of cases of severe OHSS will rise considerably. Dr. David Prentice of the Family Research Council points out that of the 80 million women who would be required for egg harvesting to treat diabetes alone, as many as 800,000 would experience OHSS.

Father Berg of the Westchester for Ethics and the Human Person confirms the holy alliance forging between pro-lifers and women truly concerned about women's health. Recently speaking opposite a pro-stem cell researcher at NYU, Father Berg observed that the liberal audience overwhelming agreed that the exploitation potential of women is "real".

California Catholic Daily - “Hands off our ovaries!”

Aren't we lucky here in Missouri that we had enough "enlightened" politicians, media guru's, talking heads and all-around useful idiots to convince a majority of the voting population to enshrine the protection of stem-cell research into our state constitution? We can now look forward to greeting the satisfied (and enlightened) egg donors as they pass the entrances to our state's many fine emergency wards, morgues and funeral parlors. Life is too short people. Do we really need to rush things along like this just to make a few researchers fat and happy? May God speed the repeal of this unholy amendment!

Fr. Richard McBrien -- Can't Somebody Stop this Guy?

2007-05-11T15:08:00.000-07:00

What are saints for, really?

In his weekly column, published in the May 8 Tidings, the newspaper of the Los Angeles archdiocese, the Rev. Richard McBrien, a theology professor at Notre Dame University in Indiana, said they are basically just role models.

Despite his notoriety as a public dissenter from Church teaching, McBrien’s columns run in the Tidings nearly every week. Last April, a Tidings-run McBrien column explored various interpretations of the resurrection of Christ, one of which says it signifies only "the extraordinary transformation of the disciples from weak, cowardly followers of the crucified Lord into courageous proclaimers of his Gospel." Another, wrote McBrien, makes the resurrection "a myth” signifying that Jesus “still lives in those who accept him as their risen Lord." These interpretations are problematic, McBrien admitted, but so is the interpretation “given at the opposite end of the theological spectrum, namely, that the Resurrection consisted of the resuscitation of Jesus' corpse in such a literally real fashion that it could have been photographed, if the technology had existed in those days."

California Catholic Daily - Resurrection as myth, saints as role models, not miracle-workers

Wow, I feel sorry for you parent's ignorant enough to send your kids to an overpriced education at Notre Dame University just to have them exposed to, or worse yet, taught by an idiot like Fr. (?) Richard McBrien. I'm sure that he is not the only lunatic loose in the asylum at NDU either, just the most visible. It wouldn't be so bad if he was treated like a "crazy Uncle Larry" at the family reunion. You know, everyone knows that "crazy Uncle Larry" will do or say something weird, crazy or just plain unacceptable but, after all, he is family. Just look the other way when he comes down the stairs in the pink bunny pajamas just in time for dinner.

The unfortunate truth, however, is that Fr.(?) McBrien is not alone either at Notre Dame or at any number of marginally Catholic schools. In some cases, the nutty uncle is not the exception but rather the rule and the inmates are running the asylum. Dear parents, you are paying top dollar for your child to attend a private, Catholic institution of higher learning only to have them immersed in a pathetic mixture of heterodox teaching and general moral uncertainty.

Can the Fr.(?) McBrien's of the world be stopped? Yes. Who can do it? We can. When enough parents stop sending their children to schools that support these nut-balls, when enough alumna's stop sending in their checks and when enough laypeople begin shouting loud enough to break through the self imposed deafness of our appointed shepherds...then and only then will Crazy Uncle Larry be forced back into the obscurity that he so richly deserves.

The Lair of the Catholic Cavemen

2007-05-10T11:21:00.000-07:00

In a related post to the one that I made below, see the link below to The Caveman's Lair:

The Lair of the Catholic Cavemen

Pope confirms excommunication of Mexican legislators who voted in favor of abortion

2007-05-10T05:41:00.000-07:00

Warning: contains ideas and language that would make the majority of the USCCB and your pastor down the street very unhappy.

Thought that I would post this little item in it's entirety before someone down at CNA or the Bishop's Conference realized the inconsistencies between the actions of the Mexican Bishops (God bless them!) and the Bishops of the United States (may God open their eyes!) and yanked the story.

Aboard the papal plane

Pope confirms excommunication of Mexican legislators who voted in favor of abortion

Abortion in Mexico

Aboard the papal plane, May 9, 2007 / 03:54 pm (CNA).- In statements to journalists during his flight from Rome to Brazil, Pope Benedict XVI, in a reference to legislators in Mexico City who voted in favor of legalizing abortion in the Mexican capital, confirmed that the excommunication of those who procure an abortion "is nothing new" nor is it "arbitrary."

According to various media reports, the Pontiff recalled that Canon Law stipulates the automatic excommunication for anyone who procures an abortion.

Several weeks ago, the Archdiocese of Mexico noted that doctors and nurses who participate in abortions, as well as lawmakers who support the legalization of abortion, incur latae sententiae excommunication.

The Holy Father explained, "This excommunication was not arbitrary, but rather it is permitted by canon law which says that putting the innocent to death is not compatible with receiving communion, which is to receive the body of Christ."

In this sense, he reiterated that Catholic authorities "did not do anything new, surprising or arbitrary. They simply publicly announced that what is contained in the law of the Church which expresses our appreciation of life and that human individuality, human personality, is present from the first moment of life."

Likewise, he indicated that lawmakers throughout the world who vote in favor of abortion have "doubts about the value and beauty of life, and even doubt about the future. Selfishness and fear are at the root of (pro-abortion) legislation. We, in the Church, have a great struggle to defend life," the pope added during the press conference that last some 25 minutes.

"The Church says that life is beautiful, it is not something to doubt but is a gift, even when one lives in difficult circumstances. It is always a gift," he said.

Emphasis added was mine, not the author's. If you would like to read the original, click on the following link:

Pope confirms excommunication of Mexican legislators who voted in favor of abortion

You know, it seems to me that there is a real problem with being consistent in our "Universal" Church. The Mexican bishops just laid it on the line and told everyone from the legislators on down the line that they will incur an automatic excommunication by pursuing this course of action and the Pope (God Bless him!) backed them up. The bishops of the United States are a different breed so it seems. And as it turns out, a breed without much spine, sad to say.

Except for a few notable exceptions, the bishops here in the United States have, as in a Keystone Cops feature, fallen all over themselves in an attempt to excuse and accept as faithful Catholics the lawmakers, judges, doctors and nurses that were and are required to keep this unholy industry thriving. Admittedly there is no way for either the Mexican or American bishops to force their will upon the afore mentioned lawmakers, etc but do we have to tolerate and accept these people (and I use the term loosely) in our Church? For that matter, do we have to do the same for the unfaithful pastors that have turned a blind eye and done nothing to alleviate the situation.

The Mexican bishops may well save their country, their people from the terrible scourge that has afflicted our country for 35 years. If nothing else, they will be remembered fondly for the principled stance they have taken. Most of our bishops, on the other hand, will be remembered as little more than a bunch of Quislings.

We can only wonder what it would now be like in this country if only our appointed pastors had done their duty as given them from Christ to preach the Gospel both in and out of season. If we watch Mexico in the coming months and years, we may get a small idea.

www.belleville.com | 05/01/2007 | McCaskill uninvited as commencement speaker

2007-05-04T11:37:00.000-07:00

Once again, I ask myself the question: "Why do these supposedly Catholic institutions invite these people in the first place?" Perhaps from a student standpoint, they may not understand the positions that Ms. McCaskill has taken over her political career. However, you would expect that the "adults" in charge of a "Catholic" institution would understand. I suppose the charitable position is to assume that the priest/religious/layperson in charge is simply as uninformed and ignorant as their charges but I can't really make myself believe that. My only conclusion is that there is some underlying agenda, some...statement perhaps that they are trying to put forward. Well, I'm sure that I don't know. Read the links below and decide for yourself.

McCaskill uninvited as commencement speaker

Some detractors speak

WorldNetDaily: Christians in bull's-eye in new 'hate crimes' plan

2007-04-26T10:38:00.000-07:00

Posted: April 26, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern

By Bob Unruh
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com

A fast-tracked congressional plan to add special protections for homosexuals to federal law would turn "thoughts, feelings, and beliefs" into criminal offenses and put Christians in the bull's-eye, according to opponents.

"H.R. 1592 is a discriminatory measure that criminalizes thoughts, feelings, and beliefs [and] has the potential of interfering with religious liberty and freedom of speech," according to a white paper submitted by Glen Lavy, of the Alliance Defense Fund.

"As James Jacobs and Kimberly Potter observed in Hate Crimes, Criminal Law, and Identity Politics, 'It would appear that the only additional purpose [for enhancing punishment of bias crimes] is to provide extra punishment based on the offender's politically incorrect opinions and viewpoints,'" said Lavy.

The proposal has been endorsed by majority Democrats on the committee, and already has 137 sponsors in the full House, making it possible it could be voted on in a matter of days or weeks.

Watch out! Here come the Thought Police! George Orwell had it mostly right. His novel "1984" envisions a future dystopian society where "Big Brother" watches everything and everyone, seeking to control every aspect of the individual's life including their innermost thoughts through various mind-control techniques. His timing was off by several years and the details of the dictatorship have taken a few odd turns that he did not foresee, but all in all, Mr. Orwell would be saddened to see how close he came to the reality that is unfolding before our very eyes.

If this bill is passed through Congress and signed by the President, then for the first time in our nation's history, a thought, a feeling, a time-honored religious belief will become a crime if it is communicated by the written or spoken word. Homosexuals, lesbians, trans-genders, etc, etc, etc will become protected and indeed exalted persons in our society above anyone else who has a differing opinion of their "life choices". Doesn't matter if you take physical action or not based on your belief and speech. Merely not affirming them in the choices they have made will be considered criminal intent.

All crime is, I personally believe, at it's core, a crime of hate. We do not normally commit crimes against those that we love and cherish. We have to dehumanize and hate someone before we can perpetrate a grave evil against them. It does not require a genius to understand that by murdering someone that I hate them. By beating them or stealing from them I hate them. I could do these things for a variety of reasons. Mankind has been very adept at fabricating reasons to hate. So why should the penalties be greater for a particular type of hate? Or, in cases when no crime has been committed, and only a thought has been expressed, no matter how uncomfortable to the listener, why should there be a penalty at all? As for myself as a Catholic, I have many, many times been insulted by things that people have said. On occasion I have even corrected them in what I considered an error in their thinking. However, I did not then and I do not now believe that my hurt feelings warrant a prison sentence or a financial penalty or even re-conditioning because of someone's freedom of speech.

Read the full story at the following link:

WorldNetDaily: Christians in bull's-eye in new 'hate crimes' plan

Archbishop Burke Refuses to Scandalize the Faithful

2007-04-26T10:11:00.000-07:00

Kudos to Archbishop Raymond Burke! Proud to say that he is prelate over the Archdiocese of St. Louis. Sad to say that such actions from an Archbishop of the Catholic Church is news. Now if only we could get him a more expansive territory. One of the last members of the USCCB with any spine, he has correctly stood firm in defense of the teachings of the Church on abortion and furthermore recognized the mixed signals other Church leaders have given their flocks when making their own "bargains with the Devil".

What am I talking about? Well read the two short news articles that I have posted below and then you will know.

Burke quits Glennon board over Crow fund-raising appearance

By Tim Townsend

ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH

04/25/2007

St. Louis Archbishop Raymond Burke and singer Sheryl Crow.
(File Photos/P-D)

Citing singer Sheryl Crow's stance on abortion, Archibishop Raymond Burke said today he has resigned from the board of the Cardinal Glennon Children's Foundation, the fundraising arm of Cardinal Glennon Children's Medical Center, in protest over Crow's participation in an upcoming fundraiser.

Burke said his resignation came after prolonged discussion with the foundation's board of governors regarding Crow, the pop singer who will take part in a benefit for the hospital this Saturday at the Fox Theatre. It will be hosted by broadcaster Bob Costas.

Burke said Crow is "well-known as an abortion activist."

Read more on this story later on STLtoday.com or in Thursday's St. Louis Post-Dispatch.

Sheryl Crow 'promotes moral evil'

Thursday, April 26, 2007

An archbishop has resigned from a charity over Sheryl Crow's performance

A US archbishop has resigned from the board of a Catholic charity over its decision to allow Sheryl Crow to perform at a benefit concert.

St Louis Archbishop Raymond Burke said he was left with no other choice because of the singer's support for abortion rights, calling it "moral evil".

He submitted his resignation as chairman of the board for the Cardinal Glennon Children's Foundation, saying: "It's very painful for me. But I have to answer to God for the responsibility I have as archbishop.

"A Catholic institution featuring a performer who promotes moral evil gives the impression that the church is somehow inconsistent in its teaching."

The singer is set to appear at the 19th annual benefit for the Bob Costas Cancer Centre at Cardinal Glennon Children's Medical Centre.

The event will also feature comedian Billy Crystal.

Event organiser Allen Allred said he was disappointed with the archbishop's decision, but that the singer would appear as scheduled.

"This is not an event that's about ideology," he said. "This is about helping kids."

The singer's publicist did not return a message seeking comment.

Keep in mind that it was Sheryl Crow that came up with the idea of limiting the use of toilet paper and the dinner sleeve. Check those out at the link below.

whacked-out ideas

Jihadis aspire to 'conquer France' - Israel News, Ynetnews

2007-04-23T09:13:00.000-07:00

Yaakov Lappin

Published:

04.23.07, 08:36 / Israel News

As the French people went to the polls to select a president, jihadi members of an al-Qaeda online forum exchanged messages discussing their aspiration to "reinvade France (and convert it into) an Islamic country."

The internet discussion appeared as Spanish security forces warned that both Spain and France were targets of al-Qaeda terror plots.

A post that appeared on the al-Firdaws jihadi forum, submitted by a user named Faisal al-Baghdadi, contained a lengthy historical account of "the second stop of the Islamic conquest of Europe, France, after Andalusia, Spain."

The post took a nostalgic look at the battle of Tours in 732, in which Muslim forces, commanded by Rahman al-Ghafiqi, who invaded a portion of France, were repelled by the Frankish general Charles Martel ("the hammer"), and forced to retreat. The battle stemmed the medieval Islamic conquest of Europe.

When are people going to wake up? The Barbarian is not only at the gate but is already laying siege to the city. Everyone likes to beat-up on the French (and not without reason) but they are only the most obvious example of the fall of Western Christian Civilization. All over the world: France, England, The Middle-East, Somalia, Ethiopia, Indonesia, Russia, South-East Asia, The Philippines and beginning now in America, radical Muslims are beginning to feel their strength...or more accurately the weakness of the West.

How long are we to continue blaming ourselves while rioters burn cars and deface church buildings? When do we stop sacrificing our freedom of speech for fear of insulting a radical group that refuses to not be insulted? Why are church bells silenced because their music insults a small intolerant group or violate civil noise ordinances while the Muslim call to prayer is broadcast loudly across the same cities without complaint?

What we (and by "we" I mean all the free peoples of the world) need is first, a return to Christian Faith for without it we will remain weak and ineffective. Second we must demand that our right to speak freely be returned to us on this and any other matter immediately and without restriction or fear of reprisals. Third, we must demand of our Muslim neighbors to respect our freedoms and views just as much as we are required to respect theirs. If they cannot accept this demand then they should be politely asked to go to a land that shares and embraces their views.

If our civilization is to survive we will need more people like that great Frank of the Dark Ages, Charles Martel. Who will stem the tide of the invaders in our neo-Dark Ages?

Jihadis aspire to 'conquer France' - Israel News, Ynetnews

Rudy, Rudy, Rudy!!!

2007-04-18T11:06:00.000-07:00

Looks like Rudy isn't thinking again. God bless him for the support that he provided to NYC during and after 9-11 but obviously the man needs to do a major examination of his conscience if he can spit-out nonsense like what you see here. Just for giggles, let's read his remarks from today and then do a little switcheroo in the syntax so as to place him at a point, historically speaking, about 150 years ago:

Republicans must 'get beyond' abortion for a 2008 win, says Giuliani

Des Moines, April 18 (CNA).- Republican presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani told about 1,000 GOP activists in Des Moines on Saturday that Republicans must get past social issues, like abortion, if they are to win the next federal election.

"Our party is going to grow, and we are going to win in 2008 if we are a party characterized by what we're for, not if we're a party that's known for what we're against," the former New York mayor was quoted as saying in the Des Moines Register.

According to the newspaper, Giuliani said Republicans can win the next election if they nominate a candidate committed to the fight against terrorism and high taxes, rather than a pure social conservative.

"Our party has to get beyond issues like that," Giuliani said, a reference to abortion rights, which he supports.

It was Giuliani's second trip to Iowa, where he leads in early polls.

West Des Moines Republican Linda Robel, who supports Giuliani, told the newspaper she's concerned that the abortion issue is "dividing this party so badly that we may not be able to elect a Republican president."

Ok, now let's all get in the Way-Back Machine and see how ridiculous Mr. Giuliani would look to our eyes in that era:

Republicans must 'get beyond' slavery for an 1860 win, says Giuliani

Des Moines, April 18 (CNA).- Republican presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani told about 1,000 GOP activists in Des Moines on Saturday that Republicans must get past social issues, like abortion, if they are to win the next federal election.

"Our party is going to grow, and we are going to win in 1860 if we are a party characterized by what we're for, not if we're a party that's known for what we're against," the former New York mayor was quoted as saying in the Des Moines Register.

According to the newspaper, Giuliani said Republicans can win the next election if they nominate a candidate committed to the fight against European Interventionism and high taxes, rather than a pure social conservative.

"Our party has to get beyond issues like that," Giuliani said, a reference to slavery rights, which he supports.

It was Giuliani's second trip to Iowa, where he leads in early polls.

West Des Moines Republican Linda Robel, who supports Giuliani, told the newspaper she's concerned that the slavery issue is "dividing this party so badly that we may not be able to elect a Republican president."

Wow! What an eye-opener! Good thing that Lincoln was running on the Republican ticket in 1860 and not the likes of Rudy Giuliani. Otherwise we might still see the plantation culture in the deep south.

Cardinal Mahony Asked to Deny Communion to Assisted Suicide Supporting Politician

2007-04-13T10:05:00.000-07:00

Everyone's favorite American liberal churchman, Roger Cardinal Mahoney has at last acted like a Roman Catholic prelate as this news excerpt reveals:

LOS ANGELES, April 3 2007, (LifeSiteNews.com) – Roger Cardinal Mahony, the head of the Catholic Church in Los Angeles, the largest US Catholic diocese, has publicly criticized a politician in the California legislature for supporting a bill to legalize assisted suicide. But anti-euthanasia activists are asking the Cardinal to put some ecclesiastical muscle into his opposition.

At Mass on Monday, Mahony urged Catholic voters to pressure lawmakers to vote the proposal down. “Assisted suicide is totally unnecessary - not only is it against God's law, God's plan, we simply don't need something like that,” he said. The Cardinal criticized Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez, a Catholic, with whom he has discussed the proposal. Nunez's support is viewed as crucial for the bill’s passage.

“We should be troubled that Fabian Nunez - who has worshipped here in this cathedral, is a Catholic - somehow has not understood and grasped the culture of life but has allowed himself to get swept into this other direction, the culture of death,” Mahony said.

Now, first of all, let me give the Cardinal a hearty slap on the back for a job well done! He has apparently grabbed this moral bull by the horns and so far not backed down. Unfortunately his pleas for moral judgment from the legislators and lay-people under his jurisdiction have largely fallen on deaf ears.

If, over the years of his tenure as the religious leader of the Catholic population of southern California, the Cardinal had shown the same episcopal backbone on other thorny issues, then perhaps his flock would have paid attention to his requests. For the most part, in the past, moral certainty in Cardinal Mahoney's domain has taken a back seat to the "I'm OK, you're OK" philosophy that has pervaded liberal Catholic sees throughout this and other countries during the last forty years or so. As a consequence of this attitude, Cardinal Mahoney's diocese has become the epicenter for moral relativism and liturgical experimentation.

Therefore, it should come as no surprise to Roger Cardinal Mahoney (nor to any of his successors whenever their time comes) when anyone in his diocese decides to thumb their noses at him. The good Cardinal has sold his moral authority over the years for a variety of liberal causes, even passing fancies. Why would anyone look to the California church when making difficult moral decisions? Indeed, the argument could be made that they were merely plotting their own moral course just as Roger Cardinal Mahoney has almost always done.

Cardinal Mahony Asked to Deny Communion to Assisted Suicide Supporting Politician

Scopes Monkey Trial II?: Austrian Court to Decide if Chimpanzee is Deserving of “Human Status”

2007-04-05T10:10:00.000-07:00

Ok, for those of you who may not be familiar with early 20th century American history, there was a famous show trial that came to be known as the "Scopes Monkey Trial" that was basically the legal battle that began the ascension of the Darwinian theories over Biblical teachings in American public schools. Regardless of the scientific merit of any opposing theory, from the 1920's on, the Theory of Evolution and Secularism eventually became the state religion of the United States and Western Civilization in general. Don't misunderstand me, I think that adaptation has it's place in scientific thought, however it's elevation to the level of religious dogma by many people is unscientific and immoral. Whoops, there I go being intolerant again.

Anyhow, there now seems to be another trial brewing in Austria that, if successful, is the next logical step in the Secular Humanist agenda. Here is an excerpt:

By Meg Jalsevac
VIENNA, April 4, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Animal rights activists and leading experts in several biological fields including primatology and anthropology are joining forces to uphold a case going before an Austrian court which seeks a declaration of ‘human status’ for a 26 year old chimpanzee.

With the help of testimony from individuals like ‘primate rights’ activist, Jane Goodall and wild chimp expert Volker Sommer, Hiasl’s entourage intends to argue several points to demonstrate his humanity and his right to the subsequent privileges.

Read the whole story here...if you dare:
Austrian Court to Decide if Chimpanzee is Deserving of “Human Status”

If the plaintiffs are successful...well, you can probably see where this is leading. This is a classic example of Incrementalism. First, declare that all life is descended from a primordial ancestor. This inserts the idea in the public mind that there is a fundamental equality between lower life forms and humans at least on a biological level. Second, you have a trial that decides that chimpanzees and other higher life forms are on par with humans and deserving of at least a minimum of, if not human rights then non-human hominid rights. The last step, and soon to follow on the second if successful will be to grant full rights to at least the higher forms of animals thus further debasing the value of true human rights and indeed humans themselves.

LifeSite wisely makes the observation that those who are pushing this particular agenda seem to be the least worried about those humans with the least rights, namely the unborn and increasingly the aged and infirm. Indeed, these people are the ones most likely to advocate strongly for abortion on demand at any stage, infanticide of the disabled and euthanasia. May God help us and have mercy on us all.

Old Time Radio Lives!

2006-07-14T09:57:00.000-07:00

For those of you who are already fans of Old Time Radio (OTR) or for those who haven't heard but would like to...I've added a player which connects to one of my favorite OTR sites and includes their current playlist. Recently I've been exploring OTR and would like to share. I've found that the stories are often of better quality than what is commonly found on modern television networks. Enjoy!

From Catholic News Agency:

2006-03-20T11:47:00.000-08:00

Pope’s upcoming Apostolic Exhortation likely to call for increased liturgical solemnity, reintegration of Latin

Vatican City, Mar. 20, 2006 (CNA) - In June Pope Benedict XVI will receive the final proposal from the recent Synod of Bishops for the drafting of his Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation on the Eucharist. The commission of 12 cardinals and bishops from around the world, led by the secretary of the Synod of Bishops, Archbishop Nicola Eterovic, will meet in June to present the Holy Father a final proposal based on the 50 propositions that were made at the conclusion of last October's Synod. According to a Vatican source, the commission will approve “a proposal and a plan for liturgical reform,” which will be made public in the Apostolic Exhortation that the Holy Father will tentatively issue in October. The Vatican source said that the exhortation would include an invitation to greater use of Latin in the daily prayer of the Church and in the Mass—with the exception of the Liturgy of the Word—as well as in large public and international Masses. The document would also encourage a greater use of Gregorian chant and classical polyphonic music; the gradual elimination of the use of songs whose music or lyrics are secular in origin, as well as the elimination of instruments that are “inadequate for liturgical use,” such as the electric guitar or drums, although it is not likely that specific instruments will be mentioned. Lastly, the Pope is expected to call for “more decorum and liturgical sobriety in the celebration of the Eucharist, excluding dance and, as much as possible, applause.

Ok, I think that it is safe to say that I am an adamant supporter of our good Pope Benedict XVI. In light of that statement, I believe that it is ok for me to offer B16 a little constructive criticism if the "Vatican source" is accurate in his use of the words that I have highlighted in the CNA story above.

To be honest with myself and everyone who reads this, I would have to say that I am steadfastly in the camp that believes that the Pope should use a stronger hand in cracking down on those who would pervert the tenor and meaning of the Mass. I, for one, would be willing to suffer a severe shortage of priests and bishops if that was what was required to "cleanse the temple". That is, get rid of those in authority who refuse to be obedient to the Holy Father and the Magisterium. So far, all of the popes from Paul VI to Benedict XVI have chosen not to exercise their authority in this way.

Why haven't they is the question that I have asked myself many times. Of course, I do not travel in the circles of the great or holy. I am just a Catholic Layman. I don't have the weight of the Universal Church perched on my shoulders so I am sure that their perspective is vastly different from my own. Still, let me be so bold as to offer a few observations.

The words and phrases that I have highlighted are what I would call wishy-washy at best. They are open to all kinds of interpretations and shades of grey hide behind every letter. Using words like "invitation", "encourage" and "gradual" leaves holes in an instruction that even the most mentally retarded "liturgical minister" can drive a whole church bus full of innovations through. Let me walk you through what I think is a likely scenario in all too many parishes.

Lets say that you are a very liberal liturgical minister at the local parish and your pastor thinks that the ideas you have incorporated into the Sunday Liturgy has greatly spiced up an otherwise boring and humdrum experience. Furthermore, lets say that the local bishop either tacitly agrees with father or, more likely than not, doesn't care enough or doesn't have the time to keep tabs on what is really being done in the parishes entrusted to his care. Ok, so things have been going pretty smoothly except the occasional complaint from the Neanderthals that sit in the back of the Worship Space (for goodness sakes they don't even want to hold hands during the Our Father!). Now, however, someone has given you this Apostolic Exhortation which threatens to undo everything that you have accomplished! Extremely upset, you bring it to the next Liturgy Committee Meeting and show it to Father. "What are we going to do?", you ask him. "Next thing you know, the Pope will want us to shelve our Altar Girl Program and bring the altar rail up from the basement!"

Now Father has seen this kind of thing many times before so he pats his Liturgical Minister on the head and asks to see the instructions. "Well," he says after scanning the document, "this is not so bad. Let's take a closer look at what that bishop in Rome is wanting us to do."

"The first item here is that he is extending an invitation to use more Latin in our Masses here. Well, that's very nice of him to do that. Of course, just like an invitation to a party that you don't have time for, you can always decline to go, can't you?" You nod dutifully as the first glimmer of hope appears in your eyes as Father continues. "Of course, just to say that we have done our best, we could include an Agnus Dei or two during Lent for a year or two." Again you nod even though the prospect of teaching that arcane prayer to the Music Ministers does not fill you with joy.

Father continues to read for a few moments before commenting further but you can see from his unruffled expression that Father has a favorable interpretation of the letter. When he clears his throat to speak you are hoping that the interpretation does not spell a curtailment of your much praised Liturgical Dance Program.

"I see that the Pope is also encouraging us to use more Gregorian Chant and classical music and gradually reduce our use of the more "hip" music options that are available to us now. Hmmm...well, I for one am very encouraged but I'm afraid that it is just not pastorally feasable to have Gregorian Chant in our weekly Teen Masses. As for our other Masses I think that the change should be gradual. The Holy Father is actually very wise here. No need to unduly upset the parishoners with a 180 degree change in the music schedule. I think that a twenty year plan will do the trick. Take a couple of years to think it over very well and then submit a plan for my approval. Just make sure that at the end of the plan we have eliminated at least five of those offending music selections, ok?" Again you nod enthusiastically. "Oh, and before I forget," Father continues, "it also says here that we should do away with any inadequate musical instruments but doesn't say which ones. I imagine that the drums and the tuba can stay. I know how much your two boys love to play! Be sure to put a notice in the bulletin about keeping the applause down to a minimum. No more than three or four times a Mass should be about all we can do."

"Unfortunately we may have to faze out the Liturgical Dance Program, but don't worry. This instruction is very complicated in some respects and should be very carefully scrutinized and interpreted before we jump to any rash conclusions. I think that five years should be enough for me to bring my conclusions to the bishop and then I'm sure that he will want to review those conclusions very carefully also. In the meantime, put another notice in the bulletin for anyone interested in learning Liturgical Dance/Prayer in time for our Easter Eucharistic Extravaganza!"

I know this is possibly exagerated. But it is possible and I would be willing to bet that it has happened in a not too dissimilar way in response to other "invitations" from Rome. Perhaps it is time for our Holy Father to get a little more definite and tough with his exhortations.

Traditional Piety: the Unforgivable Sin

2006-03-10T11:25:00.000-08:00

I won't paste any links to articles in this post as examples nor do I wish to hurl specific accusations. If you happen to be a Conservative or Traditional Catholic such as myself, you won't need a specific example -- you can probably draw upon personal experience.

By now you may be asking yourself: "What is he talking about anyway?"

If the title of this post hasn't clued you in on today's topic then you may very well be a Liberal Catholic and probably won't care about this post except to wish that I would just shut up, hold hands and sing Kumbai-ya. Not only that but you would, given the chance, tell me that I was being very pre-Vatican II and worse than that: JUDGMENTAL!

Figured it out yet? After reading many reports over the years and several just this week, it has become increasingly clear to me, at least, that there is a double standard at work in the modern Catholic Church in America. ( I won't use the term American Catholic Church as the formal schism hasn't occurred yet.) The first and most common standard is the one applied to the Liberal wing of the Church. (for lack of better terms I will use Liberal and Conservative instead of the lesser understood Heterodox and Orthodox) This standard, embraced by the majority of American bishops, priests and religious says that you can be accepted within the Church if you are seeking innovative and interesting new ways of worship that may or may not include the presence of a duly ordained priest, since he may not be in residence at your local parish anyway, and if you accept the possibility that the Magisterium of the Church may have been wrong all along on such diverse issues as sexual morality, abortion, contraception, sexual morality, Mary's perpetual virginity, sexual morality, the pope's infallibility and...did I mention sexual morality?

The second standard has been applied to those viewed as the throwbacks of the Church. Ecclesial Neanderthal if you will. Come on, you know who I am talking about. Everyone together now: Traditional (Conservative) Catholics. Pre-Vatican II, liturgy-hugging, pope-loving, schism-hating, Communion-kneeling Catholics. You can still see them huddled in the rear pews of your local church/multi-purpose buildings with their three to five children and their irrational feelings of repulsion towards the community building sign of holding hands during the Our Father prayer. Towards them is often applied the standard of open hostility and rejection.

Now I don't want to get into too much of a rant here because I could probably go on all day long and you probably won't want to read about it anyway. But I do want to draw your attention to one point. Conservative Catholics have been and continue to be angry with their priests and bishops not to be argumentative or overly legalistic when it comes to things like the Liturgy but rather because they recognize the double standard that is at work. We have all heard the argument applied that we should be accepting of everyone. We have been told over and over again that we should be, as good Christians, accepting of everyone and their behaviors regardless of what those may be. Therefore a good parish community will accept nearly any behavior simply because we have been told over and over again that we should not judge anyone. Anyone that is except those that wish to worship their God with a traditional piety.

Don't get me wrong, we must not judge anyone's heart, that is the state of their soul. That is for God alone to judge as only He can see our true intentions. But we can and indeed must judge the actions of others so that we can avoid that which is evil and embrace that which is good. But I digress.

Back to my original point. Popular church opinion holds that we cannot judge anyone except traditionally minded Catholics. They are in perpetual open season. Conservative Catholics it seems may routinely be ostracised and ridiculed. They may, when they resist their ill treatment be harassed and in extreme conditions "invited" to leave their parishes and diocese. This is a wrong that must be righted. Our bishops and our Pope owe us that in all truth and justice. If there is to be a true accepting of differences then it must be an acceptance of all differences, not just those accepted by the Liberal clergy of this country.

Vatican Cardinal: Catholic Voters Can Never Be Justified in Voting for Pro-Abortion Politicians

2005-10-06T09:57:00.000-07:00

Vatican Cardinal: Catholic Voters Can Never Be Justified in Voting for Pro-Abortion Politicians:

ROME, October 6, 2005 (CWNews.com/LifeSiteNews.com) - The president of the Pontifical Council for Health Care has stated flatly that Catholics cannot, in conscience, support a politician who favors legal abortion.

Cardinal Javier Lozano Barragan made his remarks in an interview with the Italian daily La Repubblica. He was responding indirectly to an intervention by Archbishop William Levada during the discussions of the Synod of Bishop. Archbishop Levada-- the American prelate recently chosen by Pope Benedict XVI (bio - news) to be prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith-- had asked other prelates to reflect on the question that had divided the US hierarchy during the 2004 election year: How bishops should respond to Catholic politicians who support abortion.

'A Catholic cannot support a politician who presents abortion as a general norm,' said Cardinal Lozano. The Mexican prelate added that 'a son of the Church cannot consider himself to be in full communion if he supports what the Church condemns.'"

Well, the decision is not formally official, but I hope that the statements issued by the Synod on this topic will at long last remove any doubt from the minds of Catholic voters. The message is: You may not vote for an advocate of abortion without committing a grave sin unless their opponent is even more pro-abortion. Somehow I expect that there will still be those who are educated to the point of idiotcy or so entrenched in the "culture of death" that they will still insist on falsifying the Church's teaching on this.

The Bishop's Synod: A Ray of Hope?

2005-10-06T05:22:00.000-07:00

The Catholic News Agency (CNA) is reporting that there may be a ray of hope from the Bishop's Synod for conservatives in the Catholic Church. Apparantly, the idea has been floated by at least one of the participants that "Communion in the hand" has been detrimental to the piety of the faithful, even going so far as to suggest that perhaps there should be a return to the universal norm of receiving Our Lord on the tongue while kneeling! No, that is not an earth tremor you are feeling but rather just the combined shudders of millions of liberal "cafeteria Catholics" as they contemplate the loss of their so called liturgical liberties.

Do I think that it is really possible that such a drastic reshaping of Catholic worship is possible? Well, if it is possible, then I think that this Pope would be the one to order it. That being said, I don't think that Benedict will think it practicable at this time to reach so far -- although he may stress that the practice of receiving on the tongue and kneeling is still the universal norm even though it is not widely practiced and even discouraged in the Church in America and elsewhere. But I do think that he will use the finding of this Synod to bolster his arguments that a "reform of the reform" is desperately needed. Even though I do not forsee an extensive reshaping of Catholic worship, I would not be the least supprised to see decrees from the Holy See demanding swift and sure remedies for at least the gravest ills tormanting the liturgy of the modern Church.

We must pray much for this Pope. John Paul the Great has laid the theological groundwork for an authentic implementation of Vatican II and the need to return to traditional Catholic piety. It may well be the mission of Benedict XVI to find a way to bring about concrete changes based on that groundwork.

2005-09-14T15:07:00.000-07:00

September 14, 2005

ROBERTS ASKED ABOUT HIS RELIGION

Catholic League president William Donohue commented today on questions that were asked yesterday about John Roberts’ religion:

“Senator Arlen Specter and Senator Dianne Feinstein both asked John Roberts yesterday whether he agreed with the comment made by President John F. Kennedy in 1960 regarding matters of church and state. Neither one of them even hinted at the fact that Kennedy was forced to make his infamous Houston speech just to ward off the anti-Catholic bigots who were trying to destroy him. Indeed, by taking us down this dirty road again, Specter and Feinstein have brought us right back to where JFK started.

“In response, Roberts agreed that his religion would not dictate his decisions as a judge, but professed not to understand what Feinstein meant by ‘absolute separation of church and state’; he then briefly cited the two cases on the Ten Commandments that the Supreme Court decided, with different outcomes, in the high court’s last session.

“Roberts handled himself well, but the shame of it is that he had to answer these questions at all. What did Specter and Feinstein expect him to say—that he takes his marching orders from the Vatican? Too bad one of the senators on the Judiciary Committee didn’t interrupt Specter by asking him why he didn’t press Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer to discuss the relationship between their Jewish heritage and their jurisprudential philosophy. And too bad Feinstein wasn’t asked whether she believes that having ‘In God We Trust’ on our coins violates her absolutist understanding of the First Amendment.

“For the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee to probe Roberts on his religion is a disgrace. And for Feinstein to do so, coming on the heels of her anti-Catholic remark the day before blaming the Catholic Church for the death of Jews in Budapest during the Holocaust, shows a boldness that is beyond belief.”

Smell The Fear -- Liberal Catholics Anxiously Await the "Reform of the Reform"

2005-09-13T09:13:00.000-07:00

For years, even decades, the heterodox wing of the Catholic Church has run roughshod over the Liturgy. In parishes all over the country dictatorial authority over the celebration of the Mass has been handed over to priests of dubious education and aliegance as well as the dreaded "pastoral assistant" (as nebulous a term as I have ever encountered). Workshops have been formed in nearly every diocese with the intent to "educate" those same "pastoral assistants" and the liturgy comitties they control in the theories and techniques they would need to "empower" their parishes with "energetic" and "innovative" and above all else, "inclusive" Eucharistic liturgies that were guaranteed to "enliven" their previously hum-drum parish "communities".

Enough of the quotation marks! Now that new instructions from the Vatican have been issued and more promised to be on the way, Heterodox Catholics from coast to coast are beginning to fear the loss of their ill-conceived liturgical powers. As the first whiffs of liturgical sanity begin to drift across the theological landscape, they mourn the potential loss of the license they have enjoyed and abused for far too long. I wait in gleeful anticipation for the "real" changes that are sure to follow...and the grinding and gnashing of teeth that is just as likely to happen.

But enough of my snide comments. Read a sample at the following link.

NCR Writer's Desk: September 12, 2005

A Question to Reflect Upon

2005-09-11T12:43:00.000-07:00

I found this question at the bottom of an article that I read at SpiritDaily.com (you can find the link at the bottom of this post) and it set me to do a little thinking. Forgive me if I ramble a little, this whole hurricane disaster has left me feeling a little bewildered as I try to come to grips with what was, what we are facing now, and what the ramifications for the future are. First, let me present the question:

"Do you know why Christians pitch in for hurricane disaster relief and not for abortion relief? I believe it is in part because the Church follows the world. The world smiles on those who help hurricane victims but frowns on those who help the babies. Christians seem more concerned about what the world thinks than what Christ commands from us. The world-friendly Church does what is popular."

Don't get me wrong or the writer of that question for that matter. I think it safe to say that both of us agree that Christ would agree and indeed command us to help the victims of this and other disasters. Helping such unfortunates, I think, falls under the umbrella command of "love your neighbor as yourself". But if I understand the questioner properly, what he was attempting to point out is that hurricane relief is an easy cause to espouse. The cause de'jure if you will. When it comes to opposing abortion or the contraceptive mentality of the world, the going gets a little tougher.

Let me give you an example from my own experience. I don't brag about this because it is little enough, but in the city that I live, on the third Saturday of every month, my family and I meet with about 20 to 25 other people to pray the Rosary in front of the local abortion clinic. Most of these people are members of the "notorious" (wink, wink, nod, nod) Una Voce Society for the promotion of the Latin Mass. Even in a relatively small diocese such as our own, could not a hundred or even five hundred turn out one Saturday a month for the purpose of ending abortion? Only a half an hour a month would be required and the rosary is scheduled at 10:00 AM: not too early for those who stepped out on the town the evening before and not so late as to cut into most people's weekend plans.

And where are the designated leaders of our faith community? Every person who attends the monthly prayer vigil is a layperson and the event is organized through the state Right to Life organization. Cannot one local priest or religious turn out not only to support the rights of the unborn but to offer advice, support and encouragement to those of their flock in attendance? Apparently not. Well, I know that their schedules are already full but perhaps a mention in the weekly church bulletins and a rallying of the troops during a homily. If a quarter of the effort was expended on protecting the unborn as was spent on such causes as hurricane relief, capital improvement campaigns, death-row prayer vigils and getting out the vote for social services legislation (worthy causes all); then surely those 100-500 good parishioners would be stepping up to the plate each and every month.

But, praying the rosary every month at the edge of the street, in the heat and the cold, in winter snow or summer drought is not very glamorous. In fact, I find it to be somewhat embarrassing and certainly the weather extremes promise to make attending uncomfortable to say the least. And when the scourge of abortion is lifted sometime in the future, will there be a monument, a parish hall, a fund or some other material memorial to those who "only" relied on the Lord and prayed? I imagine not. However, if this was not the case, then what merit spiritual would there be in it?

The modern-day Christian congregation, Catholic or Protestant, is no longer geared to gaining spiritual merit, either for themselves or others as it once was. The focus seems to be rooted more in the material world. Action items which are popular by the standards of the worldly in our society seem to take priority over goals that the Church has taught on over the centuries: faith in Christ, the sanctity of all human life, chastity, fidelity, moral issues in general are rarely addressed except in passing. Money, of which there is never enough, is seen as the key to various problems. And although financial contributions are critical in solving the short-term crisis that disasters tend to generate, these monetary solutions will not supply what is desperatly required to aleviate the massive societal ills that have plagued our country and our world for far too long.

And here is the crux of the problem. Popular causes, those whose standard bearers tend to me rock stars and politicians looking for votes invariably involve throwing vast amounts of money at the problem while at the same time doing nothing to eliminate the root cause of the problem. Solutions to the problems faced by the hurricane victims are easily aleviated by infusions of cash, easily earned and easily spent, while the corrupion of local and state politicians, those trusted with the safety of their populations, will most likely be largely overlooked come election time. Solving the problem of abortion, which requires the changing of minds and hearts as well as moral attitudes will not get the backing of those same rock stars and politicians who prefer to be able to do as they please, when they please, instead of developing some moral backbone. Vast amounts of money are spent on a medical solution to the AIDS epidemic while ignoring the one sure cure: sexual chastity.

Sad to say, the modern churches tend to fall into the same traps as the rest of the worldly. Instead of relying on Christ for solutions, they usually take the path that will offend the least number of donors. When faced with a declining "gift giving" trend, most churches will opt to find excuses for those who do not live up to the precepts of their faith rather than trying to save their eternal souls. Lest we forget: saving souls has never been a popular activity nor a priority of the worldly.

Spirit Daily - Daily spiritual news from around the world

On Feminism, Eugenics and 'Reproductive Rights'

2005-09-09T11:08:00.000-07:00

Zenit News Agency - The World Seen From Rome: "Date: 2005-07-12

On Feminism, Eugenics and 'Reproductive Rights'

Interview With Journalist Eugenia Roccella

ROME, JULY 12, 2005 (Zenit.org).- 'Reproductive rights' are a means to wield demographic control in poor countries and to destroy the experience of being a woman, says journalist Eugenia Roccella.

A 1970s leader of the women's liberation movement, Roccella is the author of essays on feminism and women's literature. With Lucetta Scaraffia, she has just published the book 'Against Christianity: The U.N. and European Union as New Ideology,' published by Piemme.

In this interview with ZENIT, Roccella talks about the anti-birth ideology of international institutions such as the United Nations and European Union."

The One War, The Real War | Fr. James V. Schall, S.J. | July 8, 2005

2005-09-09T10:44:00.000-07:00

The One War, The Real War | Fr. James V. Schall, S.J. | July 8, 2005: "The London subway and bus bombings of July 7 killed some forty people and injured seven hundred others. Such acts are yet another wake-up call to people in every country who evidently need constant graphic reminders that a real war is being fought against them on a world-scale.

Public life will not go on 'as usual' so long as militant, aggressive Islam, however statistically and comparatively small in numbers, is active throughout the world. Its analysis of the moral decadence in the West encourages it to think it can undermine the will of particularly its most effective military and principled opponents. They are not yet proved wrong. They think, with such methods, that they have a winning formula.

Just at a moment when many liberal western media and political sources insisted that this war was 'caused' by overreaction on the part of President Bush to 9/11, the Islamic militants oblige us with another graphic incident. They will not go away until actually defeated. They do not negotiate or give advanced warnings. They kill the innocent, in cold blood, precisely because they are innocent and unprepared to defend themselves. They see and justify this arbitrary killing as a legitimate means to their religious and political end, the conquest of the world for Islam."

Pope Sued, Accused Of Sex Coverup

2005-08-18T14:22:00.000-07:00

(AP) A lawyer who's suing Pope Benedict for allegedly covering up the sexual abuse of children by a seminarian says he'll challenge U.S. diplomatic recognition of the Vatican if the pope is given immunity as a head of state.

In the Texas civil lawsuit, Joseph Ratzinger -- now Pope Benedict -- is accused of conspiring with the Archdiocese of Galveston-Houston to cover up the abuse of three boys during the mid-1990s.

Attorney Daniel Shea, who's representing one of three boys suing the pope, told reporters in Rome that President Bush should ignore a Vatican request to confirm Benedict's immunity.

Otherwise, Shea says he'll challenge the constitutionality of U.S. recognition of the Vatican as a sovereign state, although similar court challenges have failed in the past.

Well, don't that beat all? I don't suppose there will ever be an end to this scandal. Anyone out there who want's to beat up Benedict XVI or the Church can always reach for the priestly sex-abuse crudgel so they can extort a few dollars or just whack a few knots on the local pastor's (or in this case the Universal Pastor) head.

CBS News | Pope Sued, Accused Of Sex Coverup | August 17, 2005�23:30:07

A Religion the New York Times Can Love by Donna Steichen

2005-08-17T11:04:00.000-07:00

A Religion the New York Times Can Love | Donna Steichen

Abortion leads culture clash in court

2005-07-22T11:12:00.000-07:00

Abortion leads culture clash in court.

DEIRDRE SHESGREEN
Knight Ridder Tribune News Service

WASHINGTON - The battle over a Supreme Court vacancy has poured gasoline on the already fiery 'culture wars' over social issues such as gay marriage and the display of the Ten Commandments.

But for intensity and emotion, none of the cultural crusades surpasses abortion. And that clash promises to peak in the debate surrounding the replacement of retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.

'This is a battle of true believers,' said John Zogby, an independent pollster. 'Both sides see this as Armageddon.'"

Their Will Be Done -- OpinionJournal - Extra

2005-07-22T11:00:00.000-07:00

How the Supreme Court sows moral anarchy.

BY ROBERT H. BORK
Sunday, July 10, 2005 12:01 a.m. EDT

What do the nomination of a replacement for Sandra Day O'Connor, constitutional law, and moral chaos have to do with one another? A good deal more than you may think.

OpinionJournal - Extra

ANGLICANS ALLOW WOMEN BISHOPS

2005-07-22T10:51:00.000-07:00

13.7.2005. 07:50:24

The General Synod of the Church of England has voted to remove the legal obstacles preventing the ordination of women as bishops.

The move has riled conservative Anglican leaders, some of whom have threatened to quit the church.

Traditionalists have argued that Jesus Christ chose only men as his Apostles – the forerunners of the modern bishops.

The most senior house of the synod, the House of Bishops, voted 41 for and only six against the motion that was introduced by the Bishop of Southwark, the Right Reverend Tom Butler.

Clergy members backed the resolution, 167 to 46.

Sorry, but I think that any hope there may have been for reuniting the Anglican Church with the Roman Catholic Church has definitely evaporated. Instead of reuniting, I think that the Anglican union will continue to wither away. Read the entire story by following the link below.

SBS - The World News

Canadian National Public Radio Broadcasts Call for State Control of Religion, Especially Catholicism

2005-07-20T10:20:00.000-07:00

Canadian National Public Radio Broadcasts Call for State Control of Religion, Especially Catholicism: "Canadian National Public Radio Broadcasts Call for State Control of Religion, Especially Catholicism

OTTAWA, July 19, 2005 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Just as Senate approaches the final vote on the gay 'marriage' bill, C-38, Canada's national public radio CBC Radio has aired a commentary by a retired professor from the Royal Military College calling for state control over religion, specifically Catholicism. While parliamentarians dismissed warnings by numerous religious leaders and experts that such laws would lead to religious persecution, former professor Bob Ferguson has called for 'legislation to regulate the practice of religion.'

'Given the inertia of the Catholic Church, perhaps we could encourage reform by changing the environment in which all religions operate,' Ferguson began his commentary in measured tones yesterday. 'Couldn't we insist that human rights, employment and consumer legislation apply to them as it does other organizations? Then it would be illegal to require a particular marital status as a condition of employment or to exclude women from the priesthood. '"

Vatican Document Forbidding Homosexuals to Priesthood Ready for Release says Vaticanologist

2005-07-17T13:05:00.000-07:00

ROME, July 11, 2005 (LifeSiteNews.com) - One of the best known English-speaking Vatican reporters, John Allen, reports that the long-expected Vatican document calling attention to the fact that homosexual persons are not to be admitted to the priesthood is "now in the hands of Pope Benedict XVI". The document will come as no surprise to Vatican watchers since Rome has previously released two official documents barring homosexuals from the priesthood. As Allen puts it, with the new document, the teaching won't "change, but the level of authority and clarity" will, since the new document will be directly authorized by the Pope.

The former Church documents make it clear that not only men who have been sexually active as homosexuals but also those inclined to homosexual sex would be barred from the priesthood. A 1961 document produced by the Sacred Congregation for Religious states: "Those affected by the perverse inclination to homosexuality or pederasty should be excluded from religious vows and ordination," because priestly ministry would place such persons in "grave danger". (See coverage here: http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2002/mar/02032701.html" )

In a 2002 statement, Cardinal Estevez of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments stated in answer to a question by a bishop: "Ordination to the deaconate and the priesthood of homosexual men or men with homosexual tendencies is absolutely inadvisable and imprudent and, from the pastoral point of view, very risky. A homosexual person, or one with a homosexual tendency is not, therefore, fit to receive the sacrament of Holy Orders." (see that full letter here: http://www.adoremus.org/Notitiae-Ordination.html )

However, Allen suggests that some American bishops are hoping the Vatican shelves the document since they contend it will "generate controversy and negative press".

Last month, as the US Conference of Catholic Bishops was meeting, Chicago Cardinal Francis George spoke on the subject. The Chicago Tribune quoted the Cardinal as saying, "Also, anyone who has been part of a gay subculture or who has lived promiscuously as a heterosexual would not be admitted ... no matter how many years in his background that might have occurred."

See John Allen's 'Word from Rome' column: http://www.nationalcatholicreporter.org/word/

Well, nothing new here, but it is sad that there has been prohibitions to the admittance of gay men to the priesthood for over thirty years but the seminaries still have to have it drilled into their heads. If one of their students continued to fail critical courses more than just a couple of times I'm sure that they would be shown the door. I think it is time that the Vatican holds the seminaries and their directors and their bishops to the same standard.

I also found that final quote from Cardinal George to be rather strange. It seemed to me that he is threatening to undermine the entire process by throwing the baby out with the bath water, causing panic that there may not be any way to find canidates to the priesthood if only "spotless" men must apply. I'm sure that the Vatican document does not intend this to be the case. There is a difference between someone who has an intrinsically evil disorder and someone who has let sin lead them astray sometime in their life. By Cardinal George's criteria, we would not have been able to admit St. Augustine to the priesthood (he lived a hedonistic lifestyle and kept a mistress for many years before he converted largely due to the prayers of his sainted mother). That is why we have, or at least had, trained formations counsellors in seminaries in order to weed out the unsuitable canidates. Oh well, the liberals won't go without a fight will they?

Vatican Document Forbidding Homosexuals to Priesthood Ready for Release says Vaticanologist

P.S: Does anyone know how someone can become a "Vaticanologist"?

Jesus would Vote with Me in Favour of Gay 'Marriage' Says Canadian Senator

2005-07-17T12:43:00.000-07:00

OTTAWA, July 7, 2005 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Senator Marilyn Trenholme Counsell, in comments made during debate of the impending same-sex “marriage” legislation Wednesday, made the astonishing claim that Jesus Christ would have voted in favour of the legislation as she did.

“As a Christian, I often ask myself ‘what would Jesus do?’” she said, reiterating a maxim often heard in Christian circles. She answered her question with, “In this case, in this time, I believe he would say yes.” Trenholme Counsell, as LifeSiteNews.com learned from the Senator’s assistant Rebecca Menard, was originally Baptist but converted to Anglicanism when she was married.

“After all,” the Chrétien-appointed Liberal from New Brunswick claimed, “we have come a long way from Old Testament days when adulterers were put to death; and we have come a long way in our understanding of human sexuality.”

What? Really? So, Senator, tell us how long you have been using LSD on a regular basis? Honestly now, how can anyone who has even lightly perused the Old and New Testaments come to the conclusion that Jesus would have condoned the idea of homosexual marriage? Of course, they never did say exactly who was being married at the wedding feast when Jesus changed water into wine did they...hmmm. Maybe the Apostles were being just a wee bit hasty when they reaffirmed the vileness of practices of the Sodomites? Naw, probably not. Just a thought. Guess some of them Canucks are just a little bit crazy...much like some of us "south of the border".

Jesus would Vote with Me in Favour of Gay 'Marriage' Says Canadian Senator

Vatican criticizes Catholics who receive Communion without confession

2005-07-17T12:27:00.000-07:00

NICOLE WINFIELD

Associated Press

VATICAN CITY - The Vatican singled out divorcees who remarry and Catholic politicians who support abortion on Thursday in criticizing the faithful who continue to receive Holy Communion while in a state of mortal sin.

The lament came in a new document on the Eucharist that details abuses of the sacrament and the need for better instruction to ensure it remains sacred. The 85-page text is the working draft of a final document that will be developed during the global synod, or meeting, of bishops Oct. 2-23 in Rome.

The paper covers a range of issues related to the Eucharist: It suggests, for example, that Latin be used during international liturgical gatherings so all priests involved can understand the proceedings, and it suggests that parishes consider using more Gregorian chants to prevent more "profane" types of music from being played.

It calls for priests not to be "showmen" who draw attention to themselves and says lay people can have an important but "minimal" presence in Masses. It says the tabernacle - which holds the bread and wine held by Catholics to be the body and blood of Christ - should have a prominent place in the church and not be shunted off to a corner.

Most significantly, though, the document laments the fact that fewer and fewer Catholics are going to Mass on Sundays - in some countries, only 5 percent of the faithful attend - and that fewer Catholics are going to confession.

Read the rest of the AP Wire Story here

WorldNetDaily: China: We'd nuke U.S. if provoked over Taiwan

2005-07-15T05:29:00.000-07:00

WorldNetDaily: China: We'd nuke U.S. if provoked over Taiwan: "NUCLEAR WAR-FEAR
China: We'd nuke U.S.
if provoked over Taiwan
Major general says Beijing prepared to use WMDs against American cities
Posted: July 14, 2005
6:05 p.m. Eastern

� 2005 WorldNetDaily.com

A Chinese military official says Beijing will use nuclear weapons against the U.S. if the Americans attack the Asian nation in a fight over Taiwan.

'If the Americans draw their missiles and position-guided ammunition on to the target zone on China's territory, I think we will have to respond with nuclear weapons,' Zhu Chenghu, a major general in the People's Liberation Army, said at an official briefing, according to the Financial Times.

Speaking at a function organized for foreign journalists, the official noted the definition of China's territory includes warships and aircraft.

'If the Americans are determined to interfere [then] we will be determined to respond,' Zhu said. 'We Chinese will prepare ourselves for the destruction of all of the cities east of Xian. Of course, the Americans will have to be prepared that hundreds ... of cities will be destroyed by the Chinese.'

The Financial Times notes Zhu is a self-acknowledged 'hawk' who has warned previously that China could strike the U.S. with long-range missiles. But his threat to use nuclear weapons in a conflict over Taiwan is the most specific by a senior Chinese official in nearly a decade."

Quote of the Week

2005-07-12T10:22:00.000-07:00

"Judges 17:6, 'In those days there was no king in Israel, but every man did that which was right in his own eyes.' "

CNA -- Canadian Archbishop warns against impending female-ordination ceremony

2005-07-08T22:08:00.000-07:00

Kingston,Ont., Jul. 06, 2005 (CNA) - In the wake of an invalid ceremony on Saturday in which a French woman declared herself a Catholic priest, Kingston, Ontario Archbishop Anthony Meagher is warning 9 women who plan to make a similar move this month that "To attempt an ordination this way is to step outside the church.''

According to the Catholic Register, an association of some 14 groups calling themselves “Roman Catholic Womenpriests,” are planning to ordain 9 women to the priesthood in a ceremony on a boat in the middle of the St. Lawrence River near Gananoque, Ont.

Read the entire article at the link below:

Catholic News Agency

Also, read my previous related post on this issue:

Catholic Womenpriests?

Catholic News Agency

2005-07-08T22:01:00.000-07:00

Pope Benedict decries “cafeteria Catholicism”

Vatican City, Jul. 06, 2005 (CNA) - Speaking on the newly released Compendium to the Catechism of the Catholic Church Sunday, Pope Benedict XVI stressed the need for Catholics to lovingly embrace the whole of the faith.

"Dear brothers and sisters”, he said, “how necessary it is today at the dawn of the third millennium for the entire Catholic community to proclaim, teach and witness to the entire truth of Catholic faith, doctrine and morals in a unanimous and harmonious manner!"

The Holy Father added that the Compendium’s completion happened to fall in conjunction with the announcement of John Paul II’s beatification process “by divine providence.”

Nothing really for me to add here except "Hurray for Pope Benedict XVI!" Another nail in the coffin of modern Catholic liberalism! Read the entire article from CNA at the link below.

Catholic News Agency

CNA -- Fr. Reese resignation not so ‘tragic’, says Catholic journalist

2005-07-08T21:54:00.000-07:00

Catholic News Agency: "Fr. Reese resignation not so ‘tragic’, says Catholic journalist

Washington DC, Jul. 04, 2005 (CNA) - A Catholic journalist and former editor of a diocesan newspaper has suggested that “[dissident] Catholic journalists feeling ‘unfree’ [in their work at Catholic journals] would do well to go over to secular publications where their view of the Church would be quite welcome.”

John Mallon made these comments in a recent issue of Inside the Vatican in response to the Catholic U.S. media’s reaction to the allegedly forced resignation of Fr. Thomas Reese from America magazine.

In his analysis, Mallon noted that some “outraged editors of leftist Catholic journals” called Fr. Reese’s resignation “tragic” and “a sad, disappointing and to some degree shocking development.” They said his departure would put a damper on all “thinking Catholics.”

“The implication is that if you accept the authority of the Magisterium you are an unthinking, unwashed peasant who is an embarrassment to the … American Catholic Church,” said the former editor of Oklahoma City’s Sooner Catholic. “And this perhaps is what is most offensive about theological dissent: the inherent snobbery of it all.”"

A very insightful article especially where it exposes the double standard applied to heterodox and orthodox publishers and writers. When it is an unfaithful publisher or writer such as Fr. Reese, the clamor is all about how "repressive" and "tragic" the situation is. On the other hand, when an orthodox writer or publisher is pushed from his post due to liberal pressure, not a word is uttered.

Read the entire article at the link provided at the top of this post.

CNS STORY: Bishops' president spells out issues, positions for court nominee

2005-07-08T21:45:00.000-07:00

CNS STORY: Bishops' president spells out issues, positions for court nominee: "By Catholic News Service

WASHINGTON (CNS) -- The president of the U.S. bishops' conference has spelled out specific positions on a range of issues he said he hoped President George W. Bush would look for as he chooses a nominee for the Supreme Court to replace retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.

'I urge you to consider for the court qualified jurists who, pre-eminently, support the protection of human life from conception to natural death, especially of those who are unborn, disabled or terminally ill,' said Bishop William S. Skylstad of Spokane, Wash., in a letter to the president dated July 1. The text of the letter was released July 6 by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops."

Reuters AlertNet - Catholics cannot support abortion rights-Vatican

2005-07-08T21:44:00.000-07:00

By Philip Pullella

VATICAN CITY, July 7 (Reuters) - The Vatican on Thursday said too many Roman Catholics were not taking their religion seriously and that those faithful who receive communion and still support abortion rights were behaving scandalously.

In an 88-page working document for a synod of bishops to be held in October, the Vatican also decried dwindling attendance at Sunday Mass and reaffirmed a rule that Catholics who divorce and remarry outside the Church cannot take communion.

The document on the theme of the Eucharist said many Catholics had lost the sense of the sacred surrounding communion, which the Church teaches becomes the body and blood of Christ during the Mass.

One part of the document returned to an issue that remains particularly hot in the United States -- whether Catholics who support abortion rights can receive communion.

'Some receive communion while denying the teachings of the Church or publicly supporting immoral choices in life, such as abortion, without thinking that they are committing an act of grave personal dishonesty and causing scandal,' it said.

'Some Catholics do not understand why it might be a sin to support a political candidate who is openly in favour of abortion or other serious acts against life, justice and peace,' it said."

Unfortunately, these are issues that even Roman Catholics are in need of reminding. A timely instruction from the Vatican in light of the one and possibly two new justices to be nominated and confirmed to the Supreme Court. There are CINO senators such as Teddy Kennedy and John F. Kerry who have long ago dropped their faith along the roadside in the name of political expediency. We can only pray and hope that ones such as these will read and take to heart this and other similar instructions from our Church if not for their own good, then for the good of their their constituents.

Reuters AlertNet - Catholics cannot support abortion rights-Vatican:

Catholics in the Public Square -- Judicial Lables & Roe v. Wade

2005-07-08T21:31:00.000-07:00

Catholics in the Public Square: "Judicial Labels & Roe v. Wade

Posted by Oswald Sobrino at 10:57 AM

What has emerged in recent history is that the Supreme Court has become a forum for implementing brazenly political agendas of liberal social engineering. That is why today, empirically and honestly speaking, it is clear that the Supreme Court is nothing more than a politicized committee that produces incoherent judicial decisions as its end product. The ideal is, rather, for a Supreme Court in which the high caliber of justices means that each justice follows a consistent judicial philosophy rooted in deference to the legislative branch, except in cases where clear fundamental, constitutional rights are threatened.

Such a consistent judicial philosophy, rooted in a democratic understanding of courts as institutions that must defer whenever possible to democratic legislatures, would abandon any efforts at liberal social engineering, whether the scheme is to make abortion-on-demand a nationwide convention or to remake marriage into something utterly unrecognizable.

But that is a tall order. The level of mediocrity on the Supreme Court means that many recent justices have no sane judicial philosophy to speak of--rather the mediocre have just lurched from issue to issue under the all-purpose legal fig leaf that they are just adjusting to different facts. The real fact is that judicial philosophy determines which facts are decisive. Raw facts in themselves don't determine legal results because there are in fact no 'raw facts' in the law: all facts must be weighed using a sane judicial philosophy, much as jurors are given detailed legal instructions to guide their deliberations. As odd as it may appear, we may need somebody to give legal instructions to the Supreme Court before they themselves begin to deliberate. In recent years, many of the justices have proven unable to find the law.
"

125th Anniversary Issue: Science Online Special Feature -- 125 Top Questions that Scientists Can't Explain

2005-07-08T21:29:00.000-07:00

I ran across this the other day and thought I would include this on the blog just for a bit of fun. It is amazing just how little we know with scientific certainty and even topics such as the Theory of Evolution which are held to be true are still scientifically unproven theories!

Stretch your mental capacity with these 125 top science stumpers but don't strain anything in the attempt. Many or most of these will probably never be adequately explained on this side of the grave.

125th Anniversary Issue: Science Online Special Feature

BBC NEWS | Americas | US Church backs same-sex marriage

2005-07-08T21:17:00.000-07:00

The million-strong United Church of Christ (UCC) has become the first major US Christian denomination to come out in support of gay marriage.
The UCC's general synod passed a resolution affirming "equal rights for couples regardless of gender".

The decision is not binding and will not require pastors to marry same-sex couples, though some already do.

Several other Churches have endorsed gay civil partnerships but have not given them the status of marriage.

The Episcopal Church (the US branch of the Anglican Communion) and the Evangelical Lutheran Church permit same-sex unions, while the Presbyterian Church is seeking to resolve severe disagreements over the issue.

Well, here we go again. What madness this is that supposedly "Christian" churches (ChINO? - Christian in Name Only?)can openly endorse such practices. And as the article makes clear, the UCC is not the only denomination that is struggling with this issue. Perhaps God has abandoned them to their sin much as He did with Sodom and Gomorha.

BBC NEWS Americas US Church backs same-sex marriage

Website: Roman Catholic Womanpriests?

2005-07-07T10:10:00.000-07:00

After having reported on a couple of occasions about the phenomenon of "ordaining" women and since there is a group in Canada that is planning another such "ordination" later this month, I thought it might be informative to do some internet research on the matter. What I found was the website of the group "Roman Catholic Womanpriests". It is this group which ordained the infamous Danube 7 in Germany and now will be doing the same on the St. Lawrence river between Canada and the United States.

It is very difficult for me personally to take an objective view of this group's activities so I will limit my comments in order to be civil. Let me say however, that after reading the material on their website, my gut instinct tell me that "women's equality" is not their primary goal. Their writings so infused with half-truths and outright lies made it difficult to descern their full intent. But perhaps I am being too judgemental. Perhaps, and I hope that this is their real problem, they have allowed their pride to blind them to any truth or argument which does not support their position. If this is the case, then perhaps their culpability will be lessened. The link below will allow you to make your own decision.

Roman Catholic Womanpriests - Prayers & Liturgies

RightMarch.com - Contact President Bush about his Supreme Court Nominee

2005-07-07T09:46:00.000-07:00

Ask Bush to Nominate a TRUE Conservative to the Supreme Court
Ask the President to Keep His Campaign Promise!

During the 2000 presidential campaign, Gov. George W. Bush repeated a number of times that, if elected and if a Supreme Court slot opened up, he would nominate a judge that held the same judicial philosophy as Justices Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia.

Click the link below to send an email to the President on this very important issue!

RightMarch.com - Patriotism In Action.

Deal W. Hudson -- Moment of Truth for the White House

2005-07-07T05:49:00.000-07:00

As always, Deal Hudson has some insightful comments on the issues of today and how they effect Catholics and Christians in general. This time, he has taken aim at the issue that is in the thoughts of nearly all politically minded people, Christian or not: the upcoming nomination/battle for the next Supreme Court justice. Please take the time to read the entire article below.

Deal W. Hudson

In This Issue:

Moment of Truth for the White House

The resignation of Justice Sandra Day O'Connor is - without any exaggeration - a moment of truth for the White House.

Pro-life voters have high expectations, and well they should. They have been the staunchest supporters of George W. Bush.

Since the early days of his first Presidential campaign, Bush has included the pro-life community at the heart of his political coalition. They have responded to his message of compassionate conservatism, seeing that message as fundamentally pro-life, though not as comprehensive as they sometimes wished.

Bush's 2000 television speech on stem cells basically confirmed pro-life confidence in the President's commitment to a culture of life. Yet, there was some disappointment that the President allowed federally funded research on existing stem cell lines.

Whatever disappointment some pro-lifers felt as a result of the stem cell decision, or any subsequent one, they always comforted themselves with the fact that Bush would be nominating the next Justice to the Supreme Court.

Indeed, it is this hope that drove the pro-life engine through both elections and their continued support for the Bush legislative agenda.

In the days approaching the nomination, there will be a multitude of arguments made about why the nominee should not be an "extremist," i.e., a pro-life jurist.

Senator Edward Kennedy has already made the most contentious remark of all: "If the President abuses his power and nominates someone who threatens to roll back the rights and freedoms of the American people, then the American people will insist that we oppose that nominee, and we intend to do so."

When a supposedly Catholic Senator calls the nomination of a pro-life justice an "abuse of power" we are surely descending into a political maelstrom where anything can and will be said.

None of these absurd comments should give the White House even a moment of hesitation. The people of faith who helped elect the President twice will dismiss the hullabaloo that will erupt in the Senate and the media.

Let there be a hullabaloo.

And, as for media, they already know how the media will report this event. They already can predict the labels that will be slapped on the nominees.

After all, pro-lifers have been called names all their lives.

Some political operatives will argue that a pro-life nominee will lead to the defection of key Republican votes, and even the "nuclear option" may fail.

Pro-lifers will say, "So what!" They expect the President to nominate on the basis of his principles and, as the saying goes, "let the chips fall where they may."

Without the addition of a conservative justice we can expect future cases before the Court, such as Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood (O4-1144), to continue undermining the culture. Planned Parenthood is currently suing the Attorney General of New Hampshire to overturn a state law requiring parents of minors (under age 18) to be notified at least 48 hours before an abortion can be performed. Lower courts declared the law unconstitutional because it did not make an exception for medical emergencies.

If the new configuration of the Supreme Court does not uphold laws such as parental notification and partial birth abortion, pro-lifers will point their fingers at the White House.

The White House, without doubt, understands all of this. They know the pro-life community inside and out. They also know that a slip-up on this nomination will undo years of Bush coalition building for the Republican Party.

Since the 1996 Presidential election, for example, 15 % of the overall Catholic vote has moved toward Bush, from 37% in 1996 to 57% in 2004. That translates to approximately 4,350,000 votes nationally (many of them in key swing states).

These Catholic votes combined with an Evangelical vote of 78% gives Bush's Republican coalition a decisive edge in national elections.

Disappointing the pro-life voter would also directly impact the 2006 elections, especially the Pennsylvania Senatorial race between Rick Santorum and Bob Casey, Jr. Santorum's religious grassroots, already dispirited by his support for Arlen Specter, would be completely deflated.

There isn't a leader in pro-life politics, Catholic and Evangelical, who hasn't spoken out on the importance of this nomination. From Fr. Frank Pavone (Priests for Life) and Judie Brown (American Life League) to Dr. James Dobson (Focus on the Family) and Jay Sekulow (American Center for Law and Justice) and there is absolute unanimity - this is no time for compromise.

My advice is to prepare for a long and bitter fight over the next nominee. This nominee will be subjected to unprecedented media scrutiny and a relentless and well-funded attack from the left. Whoever it is will need our prayers.

The Senate Minority Leader, Sen. Harry Reid, already signaled what the atmosphere will be like when the nominee comes before the Senate. Judge Henry Saad is the President's nominee to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit, the first Arab-American to be nominated to such a post.

During one of the filibuster debates, Reid said about Saad, "He's one of those nominees. All you need to do is have a member go upstairs and look at his confidential report from the FBI, and I think we would all agree there is a problem there."

Senator Reid knows that FBI background reports are confidential, and to reveal anything about them is improper and unethical. Yet, neither did he flinch in making his remarks nor did he apologize for them later.

Reid's threatening behavior is a pale foretaste of what is in store for Bush's Supreme Court nominee.

Spirit Daily - BRING BACK THE BELLS: MASS SEEN AS IN REAL NEED OF RETURN TO SENSE OF SACRED

2005-07-06T10:56:00.000-07:00

Spirit Daily - Daily spiritual news from around the world

Timely Quote of the Week

2005-07-06T10:55:00.000-07:00

"God Who gave us life gave us liberty. Can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are the gift of God?" -- Thomas Jefferson

CNA: French woman invalidly ordained as ‘priest’

2005-07-06T10:45:00.000-07:00

French woman invalidly ordained as ‘priest’

LYON, France, July 5 (CNA) - A French woman who invalidly had herself ‘ordained’ as a Catholic priest on Saturday, is now facing automatic excommunication for her actions, which fall squarely in opposition to Church teaching.

During a small ceremony held on a boat, Genevieve Beney, joined by other so-called female priests and bishops, pronounced herself a Catholic priest calling it a stand against the “obsolete” and “unjust” practice of the Church to ordain only men as priests.

In a statement read before boarding the boat, Beney said, "This is not a rupture with the Roman Catholic Church…If there is a rupture on my part, it is with a situation that I consider to be obsolete and unjust to women."

She added in an earlier interview that, "We consider ourselves Catholic…But we do not agree with the church law ... that says only a baptized male can be ordained as a priest."

Lyon’s Archbishop, Philippe Barbarin, implored Beney earlier in the week not to follow through with the “ordination” saying that it would “constitute a serious act of rupture in respect to the Catholic Church."

"There will be no truth to the words that will be pronounced," Barbarin added. "For many Catholics, this will be a source of useless injury and suffering."

Although many questions have been raised about Church action against Beney, Vincent Feroldi, a spokesman for the Archbishop said that no decree of excommunication would necessary in a technical sense, because of the fundamental violation of Church law Beney’s actions constitute.

The violation makes her automatically incapable of receiving the sacraments, he said.

Beney is also married, which many say, simply adds insult to injury in her disregard for Church teaching, as he Roman Catholic Church asks men who become priests to remain celibate.

Does Cannon Law provide for an "insanity plea"?

WorldNetDaily: O'Connor steps down

2005-07-01T12:28:00.000-07:00

Â© 2005 WorldNetDaily.com

Sandra Day O'Connor
Justice Sandra Day O'Connor announced her retirement today, creating the first Supreme Court vacancy in 11 years.

O'Connor, 75, a swing vote on issues such as abortion and homosexual rights, said she plans to leave before the start of the court's next term in October.

In a letter to President Bush, she wrote:

"This is to inform you of my decision to retire from my position as an associate justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, effective upon the nomination and confirmation of my successor. It has been a great privilege indeed to have served as a member of the court for 24 terms. I will leave it with enormous respect for the integrity of the court and its role under our constitutional structure."

Considered to be a swing vote on key issues, Justice O'Connor's replacement will be hotly contested by liberals if a conservative nominee is selected by President Bush as he has repeatedly promised to do. When and if he does select a person who will, like Justice Scalia, take a strict constructionist view of the Constitution, expect the so-called truce on judicial filibustering in the Senate to go straight out the window. Now is the time when we will see what our elected representatives from both parties are made of. I fully expect the liberals to froth at the mouth over anyone who even hints at disagreeing with Roe v. Wade or homosexual rights, however, I think that it is up in the air how strong or committed the conservatives are. Read the entire story at the link below:

WorldNetDaily: O'Connor steps down

WorldNetDaily: Margaret Sanger's nation of 'morons'

2005-06-30T18:12:00.000-07:00

Editor's note(WorldNetDaily): The following commentary is excerpted from Jack Cashill's eye-opening new book, "Hoodwinked: How Intellectual Hucksters Have Hijacked American Culture," where he shows how, over the last century, "progressive" writers and producers have been using falsehood and fraud as their primary weapons in their attack on America.

© 2005 WorldNetDaily.com

Although Planned Parenthood has tried desperately to shred the files of its founding mother, Margaret Sanger herself has left a detailed record of how she lived and how she thought. The most unimpeachable source of the former is her autobiography, written in 1938, and of the latter, her landmark book, "The Pivot of Civilization," written in 1922.

"A religion without a name was spreading over the country," Sanger enthuses about those heady days before World War I. "The converts were liberals, socialists, anarchists, revolutionists of all shades." Then living in New York, Sanger wanted part of the action.

WorldNetDaily: Margaret Sanger's nation of 'morons'

Hate Crimes Laws Endanger Religious Liberty

2005-06-30T18:07:00.001-07:00

As always, Deal Hudson has proven to be a very insightful thinker and writer. I have included the entire text of his latest edition of "The Window" which I receive by email. If you are not already receiving this fine email publication, I urge you to sign up immediately.

The Window:

Deal W. Hudson

Hate Crimes Laws Endanger Religious Liberty

Catholic priests in Canada are on the verge of being arrested for not marrying homosexuals. A Canadian archbishop, testifying against same-sex marriage, was publicly ridiculed by an openly-gay member of Parliament. A Christian evangelist has been charged with a hate crime for distributing literature against same-sex marriage.

Why? Canada is in the midst of a national debate over same-sex marriage. And the Catholic Prime Minister Paul Martin, who calls himself a strong Roman Catholic, has vowed to sign pending same-sex marriage legislation which, combined with the Canadian hate crimes laws of 2003, threatens to strike at the very heart of Canada's religious liberty.

An openly-gay member of the Canadian Parliament, Real Menard, recently showed open contempt for Ottawa's Archbishop Marcel Gervais when he testified on same-sex marriage. Menard accused him of having a stone age morality, adding that the notion of marriage being linked to the raising of children is "from the time of the Flintstones."

Church officials are concerned that they will be vulnerable to lawsuits when priests refuse to marry homosexuals. There's already been a lawsuit against the Knights of Columbus in British Columbia in which a lesbian couple accused the Knights of discrimination because the local KOC chapter refused to rent them a hall for their wedding reception.

Indeed, several weeks ago Canadian Justice Minister Irwin Cotler said that he cannot guarantee full protection to religious organizations that refuse to marry homosexuals.

Some gay activists in Canada are promoting the idea that the Catholic Church should lose its tax-exempt status.

You don't have to commit an act of violence in Canada to be guilty of a hate crime. You only have to be guilty of publicly inciting hatred (Section 319). The law states further that if you make statements in a public place which incite hatred against an identifiable group in such a way that there will likely be a breach of the peace, you can be arrested.

Take the case of Bill Whatcott, a Canadian pro-life activist who heads a group called Christian Truth Activists. The Saskatchewan Human Rights Tribunal told him to stop distributing literature describing gay marriage as sodomite marriage, and he refused. Whatcott's flyers were termed "offensive" and an "affront on the basic tenets of our society, which is about multiculturalism, tolerance and peaceful co- existence", according to Steve Camp of the Edmonton police hate crimes unit.

Will this kind of legal threat to religious liberty be imported to the United States?

Maybe. New hate crimes legislation was introduced into both the House and Senate in May 2005. The legislation intends to increase the latitude of existing hate crimes laws supposedly without limiting expressions of belief by people of faith.

The 1968 U.S. hate crimes laws cover only acts of violence, unlike Canada's inciting of hatred against specific groups. The new bill, the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Act of 2005 (H.R. 2662), introduced by Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-MA) in the Senate and Rep John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI) in the House, adds sexual orientation, gender and disability to the categories covered under the existing law.

The House version, however, adds yet another category, "gender identity," making it the first time "trans-gendered" persons have been recognized by name in federal legislation.

Ninety-six members of the House have co-sponsored the bill (91 Democrats and 5 Republicans). In the Senate, 43 senators are sponsoring it (38 Democrats and 5 Republicans).

Sen. Kennedy has been trying to expand hate crimes laws for over a decade. Thus far, religious groups have succeeded in rallying Congress to defeat these potential threats to expressions of religious faith. But this new bill claims to have solved the problem. It has even received the good housekeeping seal of approval from the ACLU. "This carefully crafted measure shows that you can prosecute hate crimes without attacking freedom of expression," said Christopher E. Anders, an ACLU legislative counsel.

The following subsection is supposed to assuage all fears that expanded hate crimes laws will be used against Christians and other people of faith who oppose such measures as same-sex marriage.

Evidence of expression or association of the defendant may not be introduced as substantive evidence at trial, unless the evidence specifically relates to that offense. However, nothing in this section affects the rules of evidence governing the impeachment of a witness.

In other words, whatever a defendant has said, or whatever groups he has belonged to, cannot be presented as evidence in a trial. This is supposed to protect not only his freedom of speech but also the people and groups he has associated with. Presumably, the Catholic Church, the Catechism, the Bible, and the local parish priest are thereby saved from being dragged into the hate crimes trial of a deranged Catholic who violently assaults a homosexual.

But notice the all-important qualification: Unless the evidence specifically relates to that offense then both expression and association can be brought to bear on the case of a hate crime. Judges will decide what evidence is relevant.

Given the climate of judicial activism, it will take more than the support of the ACLU or the ADL to convince most people that this bill is not a step in the wrong direction. All it would take is a judge deciding that Catholic teaching on homosexuality is necessarily relevant as evidence in the trial of any practicing Catholic who commits a hate crime. The precedent would be set until overturned or confirmed on appeal.

If you doubt that could happen just recall the recent Massachusetts Supreme Court decision mandating same-sex marriage. The Court found that barring homosexuals from marriage was an example of irrational bias.

Also consider the two Supreme Court decisions of today regarding the display of the Ten Commandments. The court ruled that displaying the Ten Commandments inside a courthouse must be examined on a case by case basis to determine if the display is neutral and doesn't overemphasize the religious nature of the Ten Commandments.

The court also ruled, in a separate case, that the Ten Commandments could be displayed outside at the Texas state capitol.

Justice Antonin Scalia, in his dissent said the ruling was not grounded in a "consistently applied principle," and challenged the majority to consider "what distinguishes the rule of law from the dictatorship of a shifting Supreme Court majority...." Exactly!

What will the ACLU do with this opinion? The same ACLU that recommends the new hate crimes legislation. Expect a rash of lawsuits during the Christmas season over displays of the Crèche. This kind of decision could provide a federal precedent for the kind of actions now being prosecuted in Canada's Human Rights Tribunals and its hate crimes units.

The example of Canada should warn us that further hate crimes legislation, no matter how deftly worded, is a bad idea.

Calgary Sun Columnist: Ted Byfield - Argument for voting no to marriage bill

2005-06-30T18:07:00.000-07:00

By Ted Byfield

Gay marriage will become a legal right in Canada before Parliament prorogues for the summer, Canadians were told last week, because the Liberal government will prolong the session to make sure the bill enacting it gets approval.

Those few Tory MPs favouring the bill, one of them Jim Prentice of Calgary, assure Christians that they need fear no unforeseen consequences from it.

Nothing in it will interfere with freedom of speech, they say, or with the rights of churches to refuse to marry gays, or the rights of Christian schools to teach the biblical injunctions against the practice of homosexuality, or the right of churches to read passages from Scripture condemning homosexual activity.

All these alarming possibilities, say the bill's supporters, are being raised by "the bigots" who oppose the bill.

There is no basis for them, they insist.

Which would be very reassuring were it not for the fact that no Member of Parliament or the cabinet will have any voice whatever on what the bill's consequences will in fact become. That will be left to the Supreme Court, a body that has been diligently stacked to produce whatever the gay and feminist lobbies call upon it to produce.

Oh, Canada! Hast thou lost thy collective mind? Is this but a forshadowing of what is to come for our own country? Read the rest of the article at the following link:

Calgary Sun Columnist: Ted Byfield - Argument for voting no to marriage bill

WorldNetDaily: Supreme Court justice faces boot from home?

2005-06-30T10:58:00.000-07:00

By Ron Strom
© 2005 WorldNetDaily.com

A private developer contacted the local government in Supreme Court Justice David Souter's hometown in New Hampshire yesterday asking that the property of the judge – who voted in favor of a controversial decision allowing a city to take residents' homes for private development – be seized to make room for a new hotel.

Logan Darrow Clements faxed a request to Chip Meany, the code enforcement officer of the town of Weare, N.H., seeking to start the application process to build a hotel on 34 Cilley Hill Road, the present location of Souter's home.

Of course, we all know that Justice Souter will not be forced from his home, no matter what the benefit to the local community. I suspect, as does everyone else except possibly the five justices on the U.S. Supreme Court, that the recent ruling by the Court to expand the definition of public use will benefit the wealthy and powerful at the expense of the poor and weak, not the other way around. Still, I can't help but cheer for the property rights activist who is attempting to evict Justice Souter. I do hope he succeeds. Can anyone say "poetic justice"? Read the entire article at the link below.

WorldNetDaily: Supreme Court justice faces boot from home?

WorldNetDaily: Homeowners stand firm despite high-court ruling

2005-06-29T11:00:00.000-07:00

Michael Cristofaro, one of the Connecticut homeowners on the losing end of the Supreme Court's recent decision allowing a city government to seize residents' property for a private development, says his family and the six others are not about to give up their fight.

"If all fails, we'll chain ourselves to our houses," Cristofaro told "Joseph Farah's WorldNetDaily RadioActive." "They'll have to rip us apart from it. We'll fight them tooth and nail."

Cristofaro's family has lived in New London, Conn., for 43 years, but the 5-4 ruling last week allows the city to push ahead with its plan to destroy the homes to make room for a hotel and office complex.

Like the Cristofaro family, many of the affected citizens have deep roots in their community, including a married couple in their 80s who have lived in the same home for more than 50 years.

I wish these families well although I don't think that the city of New London, Conn. will hesitate to bulldoze their homes right from under them now that they have the go-ahead from the Supreme Court. Now that I think about it, seems like the people of this country fought a war against another London about 230 years ago over some tea taxes that were unjustly imposed. I wonder if the residents of New London as well as the rest of us will have to fight a new war to overthrow the domestic enemies that are currently oppressing our liberties?

WorldNetDaily: Homeowners stand firm despite high-court ruling

Teaching Euthanasia

2005-06-26T15:47:00.000-07:00

Teaching Euthanasia
By Patrick J. Reilly

The intense battle to prevent Terri Schiavo’s husband from removing her feeding tube was horrible enough. To think that some American Catholic universities—and their ethics, theology, law, and medical professors—bear some responsibility for Schiavo’s slow death is almost too much to imagine.

Yet prior to Schiavo’s death, professors from top Catholic universities helped convince the courts and the public that removing her feeding tube was acceptable and consistent with Catholic teaching—even while the Vatican said it was euthanasia. Several professors sought to publicly undermine Pope John Paul II’s clear statements on the moral obligation to feed and hydrate even the most severely injured patients.

Once again we see how many, even in Catholic acadamia, are promoting the "culture of death" so often spoken of by John Paul the Great. I suppose I expect this kind of viewpoint from the secular world, but it does cut to the quick when I hear this kind of talk coming from supposedly "Catholic" educators. A phrase that I am rather fond of comes to mind: "educated to the point of idoitcy". Read the entire article at the following link.

Teaching Euthanasia

BBC NEWS: Catholic woman in sacriligious ordination

2005-06-25T23:44:00.000-07:00

Three years ago, the Vatican moved decisively against an international movement for the ordination of women when it excommunicated the so-called Danube Seven.

Seven women had claimed the status of priests after a form of ordination ceremony held on a boat moored on the river Danube.

Now a similar ceremony has taken place in a private chapel in central Europe.

Well, here we go again! (heavy sigh) Perhaps it is the lateness of the hour, but do all of the women involved in this sacrilege look like angry lesbians to you? I've noticed the same phenomenon on several other occasions and just wanted to let you know what my gut was telling me.

Ok, so that is not very Christiany of me, (my wife's term), but if the shoe fits... It's just that it really frosts my you know what when I see a group of "people" not only being disobedient to the Church to which they claim to support and belong, but making a defiant issue of their disobedience!

Enough of that. Read the whole story at the following link if you think you can stomach it.

BBC NEWS Programmes Crossing Continents Catholic woman in secret ordination

Catholics in Congress

2005-06-25T23:29:00.000-07:00

I offer this as a resource worth reviewing. It is high time that we, as Catholic voters, demand that those in elected office who claim to be Catholic and who were often elected on the strength of that claim, begin to act like they are Catholic. Personally, I would much rather have one of my good Protestant brothers or sisters in office rather than a bad Catholic. Check out the scores:

Catholics in Congress

Supreme Court Removes Property Rights from American Citizens

2005-06-25T23:18:00.000-07:00

I offer the following excerpts from an article from the Associated Press for your consideration. Normally I try to keep to issues of a religious nature, especially those that concern our Holy Father, Benedict XVI and the Catholic Church. But as I will explain later, this issue is thick with moral ramifications that should not be lightly dismissed. For the full story, please click on the link at the bottom of this post.

WASHINGTON (AP) - The Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that local governments may seize people's homes and businesses - even against their will - for private economic development.

It was a decision fraught with huge implications for a country with many areas, particularly the rapidly growing urban and suburban areas, facing countervailing pressures of development and property ownership rights.

The 5-4 ruling represented a defeat for some Connecticut residents whose homes are slated for destruction to make room for an office complex. They argued that cities have no right to take their land except for projects with a clear public use, such as roads or schools, or to revitalize blighted areas.

As a result, cities now have wide power to bulldoze residences for projects such as shopping malls and hotel complexes in order to generate tax revenue.

"The city has carefully formulated an economic development that it believes will provide appreciable benefits to the community, including - but by no means limited to - new jobs and increased tax revenue," Justice John Paul Stevens wrote for the majority.

He was joined by Justice Anthony Kennedy, David H. Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen G. Breyer.

"Any property may now be taken for the benefit of another private party, but the fallout from this decision will not be random," O'Connor wrote. "The beneficiaries are likely to be those citizens with disproportionate influence and power in the political process, including large corporations and development firms."

She was joined in her opinion by Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, as well as Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas.

This legal development is in some ways as frightening as the Dred Scott decision of a century and a half ago, which cast negro slaves as non-persons as well as the more recent Roe vs. Wade decision which, of course, made abortion freely available at any time and for any reason. The Roe vs. Wade decision, I might add, also classified another group of people as non-entities: the unborn.

This most current decision does not go so far as to remove the status of person-hood from anyone, but it does continue the disturbing trend of removing or reducing rights which were previously taken as "unalienable" by our founding fathers. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness were once viewed as unalterable characteristics of our American society but since Roe vs. Wade, the right to life has been removed from many of our citizens by the Supreme Court, substituting nearly unrestricted sexual license in it's place. Now the same liberal cabal of five justices on the Supreme Court has removed a basic underpinning of everyone's pursuit of happiness, namely the right to buy and own private property. I wonder what worthless monstrosity will be offered in return for this injustice? Perhaps homosexual marriage, legalized bigamy and a lowering of the age of consent.

Of course, we can still buy property, but can we really own it if a person, corporation or municipality with more political connections can be allowed to covet it for their own and have it condemned for their own enrichment? Reasons must be provided for the seizure of private property to be sure, but can something as trivial as an increase in the tax base justify removing a couple in their twilight years from the only home they have known for fifty years? Instead of reaching a fair market price for properties, which has always been whatever the market would bear, a developer may now drag the local government into the purchasing process with the motive of hijacking property from reluctant land owners for what will, I am sure, be a great deal less than what they could have gotten on the free market. No longer will someone be able count on buying a piece of undeveloped property with the plan to sell later at a higher price when land becomes more scarce, nor will someone be able to preserve the ancestral farm if they wish...at least they won't if Donald Trump decides that he can use the property better than the original owner.

Consider yourselves warned: this is just another nail in the coffin of this society in which we live. The penalty for the Dred Scott case was ultimately the Civil War which many people at the time considered Divine Retubution for the sin of slavery. What will be the divine penalty for the sin of abortion and the resulting moral chaos? Perhaps the loss of our pursuit of happiness for now but later, the Supreme Court may also remove our right to liberty as well. Once upon a time, only some of the people in this country were slaves. In the near future perhaps all of us will be.

Supreme Court removes property rights

Spirit Daily - POPE BENEDICT: MAY HE ALSO PLAY INTO THE 'PILLARS' PROPHECY OF ST. JOHN BOSCO?

2005-06-21T20:07:00.000-07:00

For those of us familiar with the prophecies of St. Bosco as well as those of us who are not, the following article from the good people at Spirt Daily is an extremely good article full of encouragement for anyone who is concerned at the present spiritual state of our Church. Please read the entire article at the link below.

Spirit Daily - Daily spiritual news from around the world

Book Aims to Set Record Straight on Vatican II

2005-06-21T20:00:00.000-07:00

A Curia official has written a new book on the Second Vatican Council, giving the Holy See's point of view on that milestone event.

"Il Concilio Ecumenico Vaticano II. Contrappunto per la Sua Storia" (The Second Vatican Council: Counterpoint for Its History) is written by Archbishop Agostino Marchetto, secretary of the Pontifical Council for Migrants and Travelers, and published by the Vatican Publishing House.

Yet another encouraging sign from Rome long overdue. Let us not fool ourselves, however. Those who have made a career by promoting the false "spirit of Vatican II" in order to further their agenda for the Church in America and around the world will not recognize this book as an accurate representation of the Council or the opinions of the Church Fathers who took part. What is at stake, namely the future of the Church, is too important for the liberal heterodox camp to go quitely into the night. With the election of Benedict XVI, they have seen their hopes dashed once again and furthermore, they fear that this pope will be more strict in his disciplenary actions.

Only time will tell, but I wonder and pray that our good Pope Benedict is planning a logical and concerted assault on the forces that have hijacked Christ's Church over the last 40 years in the name of Vatican II. Examples are being set, instructions are being issued and pressure is beginning to be applied to some of the worst offenders. I for one will watch developments with great interest.

Read the entire article at the following link.

Zenit News Agency - The World Seen From Rome

Pope Set to Return to Traditional Liturgy

2005-06-21T19:44:00.000-07:00

Pope Benedict XVI wants to restore the traditional ceremonial Mass in St. Peter's Basilica, with Latin instead of the vernacular and Gregorian chants.

Vatican expert Sandro Magister reported in his weekly newsletter Saturday that the pope is expected to replace Archbishop Pietro Marini, his predecessor Pope John Paul II's master of liturgical ceremonies.

Whoever follows Marini will have orders to restore the traditional style and choreography of papal ceremonies in St. Peter's. Out will go the "international" Masses so dear to Pope John Paul II's heart, with such innovations as Latin American and African rhythms and even dancing, multi-lingual readings and children in national costumes bringing gifts to the altar.

Pope Benedict wants to return to the Sistine Chapel choirs singing Gregorian chant and the church music of such composers as Claudio Monteverdi from the 17th century. He also wants to revive the Latin Mass.

Archbishop Marini always planned the ceremonies with television in mind, Magister said, and that emphasis will remain. A decade ago the Vatican set up a system for transmitting papal ceremonies world wide via multiple satellites.

If true, this report from UPI is very encouraging for our friends who long for the Traditional Latin Mass as well as those of us who would like to have a haven from the innovations in the Mass which have become a weekly phenomanon. Pope Benedict may be doing the right thing by setting a liturgical example in Rome and while he is "on the road", all the while planning his next moves to implement the "reform of the reform". Read the original article at the following link.

UPI News Article

Focus misplaced regarding resignation of America editor, says Catholic analyst

2005-06-16T20:04:00.000-07:00

Washington DC, Jun. 06, 2005 (CNA) - While reports on the May 6 resignation of Fr. Thomas Reese, SJ, as editor of America magazine focused on the heavy-handedness of Pope Benedict XVI, a prominent Catholic analyst believes the more interesting story is why the JesuitsÂ superior general allowed the longtime editor to resign at this time, when he had consistently ignored complaints under Pope John Paul II.

Once again, Deal Hudson has provided a concise insight to a very muddled issue. Now if only the editors of the other "Catholic" publications will realize thedifferencee between genuine discussion and dissent, we may take a giant step toward the "new springtime" that John Paul the Great envisioned.

Focus Misplaced Says Deal Hudson

Bishop enforces appropriate liturgical practices in diocese

2005-06-16T19:54:00.000-07:00

Richmond, May. 31, 2005 (CNA) - One year after his began in the Diocese of Richmond, Bishop Francis DiLorenzo has already set up a commission to enforce appropriate liturgical practice, and has implemented other measures and solutions, which he says the people want and which meet the current needs of the diocese, reported the Times-Dispatch.

Huzzah, for Bishop DiLorenzo! What the Church in America needs is more loyal and obedient bishops to direct their churches back to the liturgical principles set forth by the Roman Catholic Church. Rather than the liturgical disobedience spawned by the false "Spirit of Vatican II", our bishops should be doing as Bishop DiLorenzo is and insisting on the faithful interpretation of Vatican II and the authentic post-concilliar documents.

Bishop Enforces Proper Liturgical Norms

The Best Man for the Job

2005-06-16T19:20:00.000-07:00

This article is dated 4/20/05 but I just came across it recently and thought it a very good piece in defense of our Good Pope Benedict. Well worth reading especially given the large amount of bad press the Pope gets. Let's hope more of this kind of writing gets around. Well thought out and well written.

The Best Man for the Job

Cathedral "Wreck-o-Vation"

2005-06-16T19:14:00.000-07:00

A Visit Home

The controversy surrounding the renovation of Sacred Heart Cathedral is something I've followed off and on since the bishop announced his intentions in 2000. Clark’s plan was to "update" the small 1928 cathedral with an $11 million renovation. Yet so incensed were some Rochester Catholics that a Sacred Heart Preservation Committee was formed to declare the cathedral a city landmark in an ultimately failed attempt to thwart the bishop.

Sacred Heart is around the corner from my high school, Aquinas Institute, and several of my school friends belonged to the parish and attended its school. Accompanied by my father and my seven-year-old son, I decided to visit the Cathedral during a recent trip home to see what the fuss was about.

Now, I am not an architectural expert — far from it. To date my Catholic focus has been on catechesis. So my recognition of a bad renovation is, on a certain level, like Justice Potter Stewart's famous dictum for identifying obscenity: "I know it when I see it."

Yet another unfortunate example of a bishop and his "liturgical experts" who do not recognize that church renovations most often destroy the beauty of an older church rather than improve it. If "updating" requires another grand old church to lose it's beauty, charm and heritage, then I must confess that I prefer to be stuck in the stogie, pre-modernist dark ages.

Read the entire article at the link below:

Murderin' the Cathedral?

A Word of Thanks!

2005-06-12T17:06:00.000-07:00

Just a quick "Thank You!" to the kind people at Catholic Ragemonkey and Ratzinger's Rotweilers for including me and my blog on their blog roles. Don't know where they are located on the net? Follow the handy links I have provided at the right of this column. They are "blog-a-rific" or I'm not Happy With Ratzinger! (And I am too!)

Thanks again guys!

Pope's address on Gay Marriage

2005-06-12T17:00:00.000-07:00

Pope Benedict, in his first clear pronouncement on gay marriages since his election, on Monday condemned same-sex unions as fake and expressions of "anarchic freedom" that threatened the future of the family.
The Pope, who was elected in April, also condemned divorce, artificial birth control, trial marriages and free-style unions, saying all of these practices were dangerous for the family.

Read it ALL at the following link: Benedict Dashes Liberal Hopes Once Again! HA, HA, HA!

Just when the Liberals thought it was safe to get back into the Pontifical Pool...whamo!

Beauty Salons Fuel Trade in Aborted Babies

2005-06-12T16:50:00.000-07:00

The Observer: Beauty salons fuel trade in aborted babies

Well, I would say that this must be the last word in depravity except I imagine that someone somewhere will manage to come up with something even more morally bankrupt than spreading the remains of murdered babies on their faces. I guess that I am just old enough to remember a time when the vast majority of society would have been outraged that such a thing was possible for people to indulge themselves.

Maybe we should start a pool: guess the next level of depravity to which we will stoop. Contraception, abortion, open homosexuality, homosexual marriage, fetal beauty treatments...(?). When will it all stop?

From the archives of Catholic Ragemonkey

2005-06-06T19:44:00.000-07:00

Many thanks to an annonimous commentor today for this posting from Fr. Tharp at Ragemonkey (Catholic blogger likes Ragemonkey!). Since I was not sure how to link to their archive page, I have included the entire text here for your edification.

Let's all pray that Penn and Teller (whom I previously enjoyed) come to their senses and have a true change of heart and not one only from fear of losing their audience. So without further ado, go Fr. Tharp!

Why these men are most fittingly called "illusionists"(implied salty language in the link -- you were warned!)

Around grade 3, which would be what, age 9, I had a fascination with stage magic, especially slight of hand. I'm too clumsy to master the techniques (and quite bluntly, too lazy) to work my hands to pieces to get this stuff down. I liked being in the know, you know. I had the trick and they (the audience) didn't. The illusion is what matters.

Well, Penn and Teller were favorites of mine. The edgy, weird and wired manner of their act always added another dimension of surprise. As is the case with all celebrities, once they stray from entertaining to informing and/or pontificating, they immediately begin to falter. Take the case of the lovely analysis of Mother Teresa and the Missionaries of Charity. Certainly, one could make the argument that social services that merely focus upon day-to-day assistance are not in the long term wise because they do not address underlying social structures that result in widespread poverty. If they had made such an argument, then one could actually, I don't know, think through the issue. But instead they take the road of invective and useless, childish language, in an effort, I suppose to present themselves as "rebels" against the establishment, read the Catholic Church. Ladies and Gentlemen, if hurling insults for the sake of ratings is being rebellious, then it renders them rebels without a clue. As a matter of fact, didn't I catch Penn Gillette, slumming on some home repair show? Nice way to fight the man, Penn. I would suspect that much of the oppobrium leveled against the good sisters comes from the fact that their so-conceived liberal outreach (work with the poor) doesn't automatically force them to reject the Church's so-called conservative teaching on sex and marriage.

I'm not sure this exactly angers me because it is so darned silly. Anyone who can claim to have spent most of his life carrying those that everyone else stepped over -- and stepped on -- is reasonable immune to this. The work speaks for itself, and Mother Teresa did and her sisters continue to do exactly this. When Penn and Teller quit their homes in Las Vegas and do what Mother Teresa did, I might be willing to give them a hearing. Until then, I am, literally, waiting for them to put their money where their mouths are.

What might be lurking here is something that Benedict XVI alludes to in his book Introduction to Christianity. For people of unbelief, the most damning argument is not the one that is for belief but rather the one that is against unbelief. The venomous yawping of those who choke in their thunder boxes upon the poison of our age, cannot drowned out the testimony of charity, embodied, incarnated in those who are baptized. Call me the "starry-eyed optimist" but this furious nashing of teeth is nothing more than the confusion that proceeds before conversion, as one both remains attached to the vile stuff they have consumed and brutally wants to cough up the whole tainted pile. Staring, unblinking, into raw charity in a creature we assume unredeemable forces every illusion to fall leading to the unmistakable confrontation with a reality greater than we could have imagined.

(Tip o' the biretta to Ignatius Insight Scoop and Jeff Grace for the report.)

Homosexual Activists Cause Injury to Priest at Notre-Dame Cathedral

2005-06-06T18:46:00.000-07:00

Unfortunately, homosexual activists appear to not be satisfied with getting favorable press for their lifestyle in nearly every media outlet and television network. As has happened in other cathedrals throughout the "civilized world", the group Act Up has done exactly that at Paris's Notre-Dame Cathedral. Now violent acts seem to be part of their acceptable arsenal in their war against common decency, the Catholic Church and Pope Benedict. Follow the link below for the complete story.

A PRIEST was slightly hurt at Paris's famed Notre-Dame Cathedral when clashes broke out between church security personnel and gay rights activists who performed a mock marriage of two lesbians.

About 20 members of the group Act Up entered the cathedral and proceeded to perform the mock marriage in front of baffled tourists and worshippers, according to an AFP correspondent at the scene.

One activist - dressed as a priest - pronounced the two women married, while other Act Up members chanted: "Pope Benedict XVI, homophobe, AIDS accomplice."

Mock Gay Marriage at Notre Dame Cathedral Causes Injury of Priest

Celebrating a Renaissance: Latin Mass at Boulder Parish

2005-05-29T20:57:00.000-07:00

By Bob Tinder

More than a generation ago the Latin language disappeared from nearly all Catholic parishes. But on May 29 St. Martin de Porres Church in Boulder will celebrate the first anniversary of its monthly Latin Mass.

The liturgy, offered the last Sunday of each month at 10:30 a.m., is a Latin version of the Novus Ordo Mass, a format adopted in the 1970s by the Second Vatican Council and used daily in Catholic parishes worldwide. However, said Father Jayachandra, the language of each country is used instead of Latin, “causing most Catholics to believe that Latin was outlawed by the council.”

Why Latin, why now? “But Latin was never forbidden,” said Father Jayachandra. He noted that the funeral Masses for Pope John Paul II, and the installation liturgies for newly elected Benedict XVI, viewed by millions around the world, were conducted in Latin.“It’s still the official language of the Catholic Church,” he said. “And as the world recently witnessed, Latin liturgies are both spiritually and esthetically pleasing.”

Indeed, Latin was never outlawed and in fact has been greatly encouraged by the Vatican ever since Vatican II closed. Even though there has never been any evidence of forbidding Latin in the "Latin" liturgy, the "spirit of Vatican II" has been widely quoted as the authority to do away with the use of Latin as an intrigral part of the Mass. What is the real driving force behind removing all sense of the sacred from the sacrifice of the Mass? -- ed.

A major projectAccording to St. Martin’s music director, Aimee Milburn, deciding to offer the Mass was the easy part. Milburn coordinated a group of volunteers to plan the liturgy.

Personally I would be supprised that the decision to offer a Latin Mass was the easy part except that I know that this is Archbishop Chaput's territory. Unfortunately, many of us are left out in the cold when it comes to bishops and priests who are faithful to the wishes of the Church and who are more concerned with the welfare of the souls entrusted to them than the state of their operating funds. I hope that the good people of the Archdiocese of Denver thank God regularly for the wonderful graces he has granted them. -- ed.

For the whole story, please click on the link below.

Archdiocese of Denver - DCR - Local News

“MOTHER F—KING TERESA" COURTESY OF VIACOM

2005-05-29T20:33:00.000-07:00

May 25, 2005

“MOTHER F—KING TERESA”

COURTESY OF VIACOM

Catholic League president William Donohue wrote the following today:

“In the 12 years that I have been president of the Catholic League, I have never witnessed a more vicious attack on Catholicism than what appeared this week on the Showtime program, ‘Penn and Teller.’ The episode, ‘Holier Than Thou,’ was a frontal assault on Mother Teresa and her order of nuns, Missionaries of Charity (as well as Gandhi and the Dali Lama).

“Like most Americans, I like parodies and have no problem, per se, with irreverent humor. But when humor becomes insult, that is a different story. And that is what happens here: comedy quickly morphs to vitriol. Indeed, as the show progresses, the level of anger becomes palpable and the degree of distortion becomes mindboggling. This is no comedy—it is Nazi propaganda right out of the Leni Riefenstahl school of filmmaking.

“The Mother Teresa that the world has come to love and revere is made to look like a cruel, exploitative, self-serving nun who ripped off the poor. We are told that Mother Teresa intentionally let the poor suffer, providing neither beds nor bathroom facilities. ‘She had the f—king coin and pissed it away on nunneries,’ says Penn. As for the nuns who worked with Mother Teresa, they are referred to as ‘f—king c—ts.’

It does not bother me when they call me ‘Catholic Boy’ on the show (though the term ‘Jew Boy’ would never cross their lips), nor does it concern me when they talk about ‘f—kers like Bill Donohue [who] only see good in her.’ But when they mock the Catholic Church’s teaching on the meaning of suffering, and when they say of the poor that ‘They had to suffer so that Mother F—king Teresa could be enlightened,’ then they are behaving like monsters.

“We will mail a tape of select portions of this broadcast to many interested parties, including the bishops. And we will hold a press conference tomorrow outside the hotel where Viacom is holding its annual stockholders meeting. They haven’t heard the end of this yet.”

Let's hope that we don't. Of course, I have learned long ago that Mr. Donohue is a man of his word so I don't doubt that he will carry this issue as far as he is able.

STEM CELL BILL SKIRTS REAL ISSUE

2005-05-28T21:10:00.000-07:00

May 25, 2005

STEM CELL BILL SKIRTS REAL ISSUE

Catholic League president William Donohue commented today on the passage yesterday of a House bill authorizing an expansion of federal funds for new embryonic stem cell research:

“Those who voted for the bill sponsored by Reps. Mike Castle and Diana DeGette are quick to emphasize that the legislation is tightly drawn: it will only affect some human embryos that would have been discarded had the donor couple not consented to having them used for research. Sounds reasonable. Embryos are not being created for the purpose of destroying them (which is what happens in stem cell research); the embryos would have been discarded anyway; written permission must be given by the donor couple; and some who are ill may be helped enormously by such research.

“So what’s wrong with the bill? What is wrong is that this piece of legislation allows lawmakers to once again skirt the only issue that really matters—the moral status of the human embryo. If the human embryo is nascent life, a self-directing organism that has the potential to develop into a full-grown person, then it is morally outrageous for anyone to kill it. If this is not true, then why are those who voted for the Castle-DeGette bill not taking a cavalier attitude? Why are they emphasizing that the bill is tightly written? In short, what is the source of their caution, if human life is not at stake? If they can’t answer this, then there is something terribly frightening at work.

“We went down this road before when Supreme Court Justice Harry Blackmun said it was not the job of the high court to decide the question of when life begins. But, in fact, in legalizing abortion, Blackmun and his four colleagues made it their job to declare children in their mother’s womb to be less than human. That is why it is imperative to get all federal lawmakers to state with precision their understanding of when life begins. Until this is done, all stem cell bills should be tabled.”

Once again, Mr. Donohue has hit the nail right on the head. For years our elected representatives have danced around what should be a common sense issue. On the one hand, they do not wish to disappoint their masters who wish to keep abortion legal and widespread but yet I believe that their consciences are bothering them. The natural law written in every man's heart tells them that murdering an innocent child is terribly wrong regardless of the reason to do so.

Which leads me to wonder what fate do we choose, what justice will we have to satisfy when we choose to play politics with the lives of our most innocent of citizens?

Search On For Clues In Alleged Satanic Pedophile Ring

2005-05-28T20:09:00.000-07:00

Lest we forget, there are ministers out there that are doing horrendous things to their children other than those affiliated with the Catholic Church. I report on this not in an effort to revile any particular church for the failings of their ministers and pastors, but rather in an effort to preserve some perspective on the issue. Unfortunately, the main stream media is not interested in providing such perspective. Yes, there are priests who do terrible things. They are, after all, sinners like the rest of us. However, this kind of thing happens all the time in other denominations and through every level of society because that is the kind of society we have become. Report the news but don't forget other evils because it is fashionable or titillating to report only those crimes committed by Roman Catholic priests and bishops.

Please see the attached link for the entire article and follow the the links to the previous articles written by the news service. Warning: not for the faint of heart but instructive on the practices of the Enemy.

Search On For Clues In Alleged Satanic Pedophile Ring

DNA: The Tiny Code That's Toppling Evolution

2005-05-24T05:41:00.000-07:00

Here is an article for your edification. I thought that it presented a very interesting view on the complexity of the DNA molecule and the problems that complexity presents to the theory of evolution.

DNA: The Tiny Code That's Toppling Evolution

The Catholic Church or The "Gallup" Church?

2005-05-20T22:21:00.000-07:00

I have noticed for some time now, even before the election of Pope Benedict, that the Media (including the Catholic press media) have been relying on public opinion polls to underscore their stories. Although I suppose that it would be unfair to demand that the various outlets discontinue quoting various polls in their stories about the Church and the Pope, I do think that at the very least they should examine their polling practices.

Polls can be a useful tool. But like any tool, it can be misused and in the case of polls, it often is. A hammer, undoubtedly a very useful tool for driving nails, can also be a devastating weapon when used to strike someone on the head. Far too often, I think, the latter is the case with polls purporting to reflect the "true" beliefs of Catholics in regard to Doctrine, faith, liturgy, the Church in general and the Pope. And why else should this be except to color the general public's image of the way Catholics view their Church and the faith they proclaim to hold dear?

Let us look briefly at the well known abuse of polling during the general election of 2004 between George W. Bush and John F. Kerry. In the months leading up to election day, very few polls reported Mr. Bush to be in the lead or if they did, the lead was within a percentage point or two and often evaporated with the nightly network news reports. Even on election day itself, when exit polling could be employed (considered by experts to be the most accurate type of polling since you are sampling actual voters and not people who merely "intend" to vote), the polling through most of the day reported that John Kerry had a commanding lead. This misreading of the exit polls continued until the first actual election returns began to roll in. Suddenly the Media had to admit that there could have been some technical errors in the pollster's data.

I do not pretend to be an expert on statistics so I do not intend to float any theories as to why the polls were so consistently incorrect, however, I think that the lessons of election day 2004 can and should be applied to many of the polls that purport to correctly represent the Catholic Mind. In short, polls of this type should be viewed with a critical eye. Often these polls are funded or conducted by organizations which have a vested interest in seeing the status of the Church lowered. Let us not forget that the Catholic Church is the very last organized bastion against abortion, euthanasia, homosexual marriage, divorce on demand and any number of other liberal, secular humanist goals. Where once the great mainline Protestant denominations could be counted on to speak and teach against the vices of the secular world, they have in the intervening years fallen one by one into the secular humanist camp. Beginning with the lifting of the bans against artificial contraception, the various denominations have fallen so far as to embrace abortion on demand and ordaining homosexual bishops.

But my intention here is not to harangue our estranged brothers in Christ although I pray that one day they come to their collective senses. No, my intention is to warn you, dear reader, to the dangers of taking polling data at face value. When you read a report from a "respected" news agency that less than half of all Catholics in United States are happy that Cardinal Ratzinger was elected Pope or that the same number reject one Church teaching or another, ask yourself if the pollster went the extra mile to ensure that his data was not corrupted by outside influence or personal bias. Who was polled? Catholics who attend church at least once a year or weekly? Did the pollster make his calls from the lists provided by Catholics for a Free Choice?

Perhaps we as Catholics and Christians should ignore poll results altogether. After all, Christianity was never a popularity contest. Christ Himself was left nearly alone to hang on a cross. The Apostles began the Church with only a handful of followers who were persecuted by the Jewish hierarchy. Christians have been brutally persecuted on and off for the last 2000 years and I expect that before it is all over, faithful Christians may find themselves back where we started.

At the beginning if you were to have taken a poll I am sure that the majority would have said that these Christians were not a going concern. I think that the polls today are saying pretty much the same thing. Of course, polls have been known to be wrong.

Las Vegas SUN: Priest Denies Gays' Supporters Communion

2005-05-16T07:13:00.000-07:00

Here is a quick update on the annual Pentecost debacle:

Las Vegas SUN: Priest Denies Gays' Supporters Communion

Pope Benedict forgoes waiting period, begins John Paul II beatification process

2005-05-13T11:39:00.000-07:00

VATICAN CITY, Vatican, May 13 (CNA) - Catholics around the world are rejoicing today with Pope Benedict XVI’s announcement that he would open the cause for the beatification of his predecessor, John Paul II, who died April 2^nd.

Deciding to waive the normal waiting period of five years after a person’s death, the Holy Father made the announcement during a meeting with the Roman clergy in the basilica of St. John Lateran.

The Church usually does not start the process of canonization until at least five years after the person's death. But Pope Benedict told clergy in Rome today that he is waiving the traditional five-year waiting period.

Pope Benedict’s decision answers the requests of many of Catholic faithful, who say Pope John Paul II demonstrated clear evidence of his holiness during his 26-year pontificate.

Hundreds of thousands of them expressed their desire to see John Paul quickly canonized during the late pontiff’s April 8 funeral, spontaneously chanting "Santo subito!"

John Paul was the first to waive the five-year rule in 1999, when he put Mother Teresa on the fast track to sainthood only two years after her death.

Proof of one miracle is needed for beatification, and two for canonization.

Resignation of America editor worries some Catholic journalists

2005-05-13T11:37:00.000-07:00

NEW YORK, USA, May 11 (CNA) - The forced resignation of Fr. Tom Reese as editor of America magazine has created a wave of reaction among Catholic journalists and academics across the country.

The Jesuit priest resigned from the Jesuit-owned publication after seven years as its editor. There is speculation that his community forced him to resign because the magazine had come under Vatican scrutiny for having published articles in favor of same-sex marriage, homosexual rights and stem-cell research.

While some journalists and academics reacted with fear that they, too, could be ousted from their jobs, others’ reactions offered other insight into Fr. Reese’s resignation.

“A lot of people were unhappy with America, including people in Rome,” Fr. Richard John Neuhaus, editor of First Things, told the Globe in an interview. He said he knew many Catholics, including bishops, who were unhappy with Reese's editorial leadership, which “had kind of a carping attitude toward the pontificate of John Paul II.”

“Just as you don't expect Planned Parenthood to give a platform to the pro-life position, there's no reason why a Catholic journal should provide a platform for positions that are clearly contrary to those of the Church, and that was an editorial error that caused Tom a lot of trouble,” Neuhaus was quoted as saying.

Sr. Mary Ann Walsh, a spokeswoman for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops told the Globe that some bishops filed complaints with the Vatican or the Jesuit order about articles that appeared in the magazine.

Fr. Pat McCloskey, editor of St. Anthony Messenger, said Fr. Reese’s resignation might give other Catholic journalists and editors the notion that they could suffer the same fate.

“I'm afraid that a move like this one will cause more and more Catholic thinkers to say that they want to write for publications that are not identified as Catholic and to teach at schools that are not identified as Catholic, because there is more freedom there,” he told the Globe.

“There is a concern now about what does this mean for scholars and writers who are Catholic and what does it mean for journals of opinion," Boston College president Fr. William P. Leahy told the newspaper.

Heidi Schlumpf, managing editor of US Catholic, her publication came under scrutiny several years ago for a piece about women’s ordination; the magazine settled the issue by publishing an article explaining the Church's opposition to women priests.

“What's most troublesome is that for the ordained, for those theologians who are priests, and for people working in Catholic universities, this will inhibit the honest exchange of views," Paul Baumann, editor of Commonweal, was quoted as saying.

Bauman had arrived at work May 9 to find an e-mail from a critic that threatened that he would be the next editor to be ousted.

Maybe Mr. Baumann should be the next editor ousted. Don't let those educated to the point of idiocy confuse you. Father Neuhaus speaks words of common sense. You wouldn't expect a Planned Parenthood publication to give equal or preferred shrift to a pro-life point of view. Neither would you expect a magazine dedicated to engineering to devote space to the discussion of why life without engineers would be preferable without making it perfectly clear that that supposition was wrong. Therfore, why should a "Catholic" publication be expected or encouraged to present views contrary to the Catholic Church without explaining why these views are contrary and why they are wrong and detrimental to their reader's salvation? The only explaination that I can think of is that those who wrote the articles and published the articles believed the views to be true. My advice to "Catholic" writers and editors: if you don't agree with the teachings of the Catholic Church, then have the honesty to not present your publication as "Catholic" where faith and morals are concerned.

U.S. Bishops launch immigration reform campaign

2005-05-13T11:34:00.000-07:00

WASHINGTON DC, USA, May 11 (CNA) - Yesterday, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) announced a broad-sweeping new campaign aimed at reforming the country’s immigration policies.

Speaking at a press conference yesterday, Washington D.C.’s Cardinal Theodore McCarrick described Justice for Immigrants: A Journey of Hope. The Catholic Campaign for Immigration Reform, saying that its purpose is for “immigrants [to] support their families in dignity, families [to] remain united, and the human rights of all [to be] respected.”

The Cardinal noted that the USCCB had been disturbed by what they see as a troubling trend toward viewing immigrants as a threat to the nation rather than a benefit.

He said that, “Anti-immigrant fervor on TV and radio shows, citizens attempting to enforce immigration laws, and, most disturbingly, the enactment of restrictive immigration laws are evidence of this negative public environment.”

Cardinal McCarrick said that he sought to add the voice of the Church to the current public discourse and suggest that, “we are, and should remain, a nation of immigrants.”

The four-fold goals of the new campaign include educating Catholics and others about the benefits of immigration to the nation; strengthening public opinion about these positive contributions; advocating just immigration laws and creating legal pathways for immigrant workers and their families; and organizing Catholic legal services to assist immigrants in accessing the benefits of the hoped-for reforms.

While he acknowledged that current attitudes toward immigrants have been deeply influenced by the attacks of September 11, 2001, the Cardinal stressed that we must not “give into the temptation to scapegoat all immigrants who come to our land—and who contribute their God-given talent to our communities—because of the actions of a few.”

“It is my belief,” he said, “and that of my brother bishops, that our nation can meet the challenge of ensuring national security without closing America’s door to the oppressed and downtrodden.”

Cardinal McCarrick further noted that the Catholic Church has a major stake in this debate because “Regardless of race, heritage, or national origin, we are one family under God.”

I'm sure that I will be branded racist for the following remarks but in fairness to my reader(s) I have to voice my opposition to the bishops on this issue. I agree insofar as all people should be treated fairly and with respect. Even the most heinous criminals have a basic right to be treated with the respect due to all human beings. However, I am afraid that what the bishops are recommending is essentially an open border policy. Let us not forget that entering the United States outside the proper chanels is a felony. Therefore, EVERYONE who crosses without documentation is a FELON. This fact alone should mark any illegal immigrant for immediate imprisonment and/or deportation but the question that worries me most is how many of the illegal immigrants are flocking to this country not to find honest work to better support their families and are instead hoping to cause chaos and begin lives of crime?

It has always been considered by the international community a just right for soverign nations and their societies to protect and regulate their borders and the immigrants and visitors crossing them. When did that ever change? This should apply to not only latinos but also those from Canada, Europe, Asia or Africa. Black, white, yellow or brown, everyone, even the skilled or wealthy should be documented and reviewed before they are admitted to live freely in this or any other country for that matter.

Immigration reform, yes. Anarchy, chaos and crime at the border (and beyond), NO!

From the Catholic League -- GAYS TO PROTEST AT MASS

2005-05-13T11:32:00.000-07:00

May 12, 2005

GAYS TO PROTEST AT MASS

On May 15, Pentecost Sunday, a group of radical gay activists plan to enter various Catholic churches across the nation during Mass to stage a protest. The group, Rainbow Sash, has done this in the past and is planning to do so again this Sunday.

They have instructed their members to put the rainbow sash over their left shoulder and pin it to their right hip while the priest is processing to the altar. They are then told to go to Holy Communion and, if refused, to return to their seats in the pew and stand while everyone else is kneeling. The sash, they readily admit, is worn as a symbol of protest against the teachings of the Catholic Church on sexuality.

Catholic League president William Donohue commented as follows:

“Last year, Cardinal McCarrick of Washington, D.C. and Cardinal George of Chicago banned Rainbow Sash members from receiving the Eucharist. Cardinal Mahony of Los Angeles, Archbishop Flynn of St. Paul and Minneapolis and Bishop Clark of Rochester, New York did not ban them. This year Archbishop Flynn has told Rainbow Sash that they will be banned. He explicitly said that ‘the Vatican has communicated to me that it does indeed consider the wearing of the Rainbow Sash during reception of Communion to be unacceptable, a directive I believe all Bishops will adhere to.’

“This year, Rainbow Sash has upped the ante. In its May 2 press release, it said that the purpose of their presence is to ‘counter the lies that Pope Benedict XVI is promoting about our community’; it also said that to many gays and lesbians the new pope is an ‘aggressive homophobe.’

“By calling the pope a liar and a homophobe, Rainbow Sash has finally taken off its mask. We look for them to get what they want—to be denied Communion. We also hope the cops are standing by. To exploit the Mass for political purposes is obscene, but it is what we have come to expect from the likes of Rainbow Sash.”

Let us pray that all people who have the terrible cross of homosexuality to bear may do so with chastity as Christ and His Church have called them to do. As for those who will not accept the call to conversion, let us pray that they will have the charity to leave the rest of Christ's flock in peace.

May the bishops have the courage to proclaim the Gospel Truth faithfully. Let them not be led astray by modernism and a false charity that proclaims that all sins are relative. -- ed.

They Want To Receive Eucharist On Pentecost

2005-05-11T10:21:00.000-07:00

Homosexual activists in the international Rainbow Sash Movement (RSM) have announced their intention to receive Holy Communion on Pentecost Sunday in Catholic churches and cathedrals across the country, as a way of drawing attention to their disagreement with Church teaching on the immorality of homosexual acts.
In a May 2 press release, the American headquarters of the Australian-born movement in Chicago released a statement demanding that Pope Benedict XVI, as well as Chicago’s Francis Cardinal George, enter into a public dialogue.

The press release described the new Pope as an “aggressive homophobe” who has “justified violence” against homosexuals, lesbians, bisexuals, and transgendered people.

Read the entire article from "The Wanderer". Click on the link below.

Militant Secularists

TheInsider.org - Pope was investigating Knights Templar before his election

2005-05-11T06:53:00.000-07:00

Let me say right from the start that I am including this piece not because I believe any of it, but rather as an example of the wild speculations we can expect to read now and in the future about Pope Benedict. Certainly there has been some historical tension between the papacy and the Order of the Knights Templar. I doubt seriously that there has been much going on for the last several centuries however other than the usual tension created between the Church and any other Masonic organization. Of course, this kind of tension could reach a very high level since various Masonic organizations and governments have been know to actively persecute the Church in various locales and times. None of this has occured with the modern version of the Knights Templar that I am aware of. For the most part, the modern Knights are less than shadows of the courageous warriors who fought in the Crusades and kept the routes between Europe and the Holy Land open to crusaders and pilgrims alike. The mystique of being dubbed a Knight Templar is undoubtedly very alluring in a modern age where personal acts of valor and heroic sacrifice are hard to come by to the upper classes of society who would be invited to such a Masonic organization.

*** The new Pope, Benedict XVI, was actively investigating secret societies including the Knights Templar and the Illuminati, it was revealed yesterday. Details were exposed by a local newspaper in Hertfordshire, England. Cardinal Ratzinger was head of the Inquisition, the arm of the Church set up to investigate, persecute or eliminate heretics. But the curious thing is, we now know that he started his investigation shortly before he was elected as the new Pope. Did he know something? He certainly made no secret of his ambition to become Pope. ***

Pope’s probe into Hertford’s Templars

THE NEW POPE has reportedly made inquiries into a secret society in Hertford, the Knights Templar.

He is thought to have contacted a top Hertfordshire historian and a records officer at County Hall in Hertford.

The inquiries follow the Templars’ demand last December for a papal apology by 2007 for their persecution by the Vatican almost 700 years ago.

The demand – which the Vatican was said to be ‘seriously considering’ – made international headlines after it was exclusively revealed by the Mercury. The news also appeared in national newspapers, including The Times, The Independent, and The Guardian.

Now we have received new information that Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger made the calls prior to his election as Pope Benedict XVI earlier this month.

A source told the Mercury that the German cardinal contacted local history expert Dr Alan Thompson at the University of Hertfordshire. The anonymous source also pointed out that the Pope’s homeland, Bavaria, where he became a memeber of Hitler Youth, is also the homeland of a mysterious secret society, the Illuminati.

After we asked him to confirm the claim, Dr Thompson said: “I was contacted some time ago by a previous cardinal ... but I don't want to talk any more about it.”

Tim Acheson, a modern-day Templar, commented: “The professor may not want to give anything away, but there is an important clue in his reply. The ‘previous cardinal’ can only refer to one man – Ratzinger.”

In Dan Brown’s best-selling novel, Angels and Demons, the Illuminati takes revenge on the Vatican. Mr Acheson speculated, “Ratzinger is on record suggesting that Freemasonry was set up to persecute Christianity. Perhaps it is the revenge of the Templars that the Church fears, since the origin of Freemasonry is rooted in the persecution of the Templars by the Church.”

Before he became Pope, Cardinal Ratzinger led the Vatican committee once known as the ‘Inquisition’. Among its roles is to consider apologies to groups persecuted by the church.

Such groups include the Knights Templar, a secretive Order of warrior monks who were persecuted by King Phillip IV of France and Pope Clement V from October 13, 1307.

The Mercury’s source also claimed that the cardinal contacted Herts County Council's environmental records officer, Alison Tinneswood.

Ms Tinneswood would not comment this week and, seeking refuge in the “Data Protection Act”, a Herts County. Council spokesman refused to confirm or deny that a member of staff had been contacted by the Vatican.

A press officer for the Holy See pledged to look into the matter.

Mr Acheson observes an ironic historical connection between the Templars and the name of the new Pope.

He added, cryptically: “The pontiff chose Benedict as his papal title, a name with special significance for the Knights Templar. The Rule of the Templars, which is like a code of conduct for the Order, was originally known as the Rule of Benedict.”

SOURCE

Hertfordshire Mercury, “Pope’s probe into Hertford’s Templars”, page 25, 29 April 2005.
http://www.herts-essex-news.co.uk/news/mercury/hertfordshire_mercury/
Archived: http://www.theinsider.org/mailing/article.asp?id=1149

TheInsider.org - Pope was investigating Knights Templar before his election

The Bully Pulpet

2005-05-10T10:54:00.000-07:00

I was watching EWTN Live with Fr. Pachwa the other night and although I have forgotten his guest's name (sorry!), I thought that one of the studio audience posed and interesting question. He asked, and I am paraphrasing here, "With all the talk about stem-cell research, euthanasia, same-sex marriage and abortion, why do we not hear from the pulpets discourses on these great moral questions of the day?" The guest replied very honestly, "That's my question too."

Mine too for that matter. For a long time now I have noticed a distinct void emanating from the pulpits of most of the Catholic churches that I have attended over the years. I say "most" because there was one priest a few years ago who was willing to tell it like it was. Not to get into a rant, let me just say that he has been re-assigned as a chaplain to a convent of nuns in another state. Lucky for them, bad for me. But I digress. Suffice to say that the vast majority of homilies that I have heard since I returned to the Church (yes, another re-vert) have been either warmed-over "community" oriented sermons or "can you please tithe a little more?" talks. Occasionally I have even been exposed to thinly disguised Democratic get out the vote sermons. If you haven't had to sit through one of those before, let me tell you that it can be more than a little disturbing to listen to a priest of the Catholic Church try to explain why it is acceptable to vote for a strongly pro-abortion presidential candidate. But again, I digress.

So why don't we as Catholics get the real "meat and potatoes" of Catholic doctrine from our local pulpits? Honestly, I don't know the answer to that one either. Not that I think that there is a single answer for such a thorny question as this. However, I think that there may be answers available and these answers will mirror what the local pastor or bishop thinks is most important.

I'm not listing these in order of importance, just the order they pop into my head, so bear with me.

Fear of Losing Popularity

No doubt a contender for the number one reason since it is a very common human failure in almost everyone. No one likes being disliked and since it is nearly impossible to please everyone in any given parish, the tendency is to side with the majority. That way you, as the pastor, are disliked by the smallest number of people, namely the orthodox bunch.

Alright, maybe I'm getting a little bit snippy about this, but take a good hard look around your own parish next time you go to Mass. Don't you think that most of the people there (and statistics prove this to be true over and over again) don't want to be reminded that artificial birth control is immoral? How many of the families there have more than one or two children? Maybe mom and dad are living a celibate life? Possibly they're just really, really good at Natural Family Planning? Well...maybe.

And what about abortion? If the contraceptives fail, don't they want an excape hatch? More than half of those describing themselves as Catholic agree with abortion to one degree or another. Or at least don't want to get involved with telling someone else what to do with their own (or their children's) bodies. Maybe their own daughter has a boyfriend who is almost, possibly ready to get married. If that all falls apart, especially because an unexpected pregnancy happens (isn't it funny how people just "accidentially" get pregnant?), don't they want their daughter to have the option to save the rest of her life?

So what happens to the priest who teaches the faith "in and out of season", in cases like this? Often calls are made to the Chancery about how rigid Father is being. Maybe Father is doing some things that he shouldn't? You get the idea. The smear campaign starts. Donations start to go down. The bishop's appeal isn't as big a success as it could have been.

Why go through all of that? Just be more popular. Father is just really, really nice.

Which brings us to our second reason:

Fear of the Small Collection Plate

This ties in very nicely with the first reason. After all, how can an unpopular priest expect to increase the collection plate? Let's be honest here. Parishes and Dioceese run on the collection plate unless you live in an undeveloped part of the world where sweat equity is the major coinage. No cash, no heating and cooling. No money for Father's pet projects and refurbishing/redecorating plans. How is the new parish hall going to be built? Somebody's got to be hired to move that organ from the choir loft so that more people can be included (read: seen and noticed) in the Liturgical Celebration (ie: the Mass).

Everyone knows that happy parishoners are generous parishoners...or at least so I've been told. And that may may be right. I'm sure that those parishoners with no children have more money to spare for the collection plate than those with three or four. So how do you, if you are a pastor, keep your parishoners happy? First of all, be entertaining (an entirely different subject that I might get around to exploring), and above all else, don't challenge their morals, which is guaranteed to make them unhappy pretty darn quick. Why, they might even leave the parish all together and attend a church that is a little less challenging.

The Socialist Manefesto

I know many people are going to say that I am being more than a little harsh on this one, but honestly I think that especially among the older generation of priests, they are so extremely liberal, not only in their theological views but also their social views as to border on being socialists. I suppose one could be very liberal on social concerns such as government spending, the military and voting and still be faithful to the core beliefs of the Catholic Church but I can't think of one example where this was the case. There was a movement among priests during the 70's mostly in Latin and North America called Liberation Theology. Without getting into another deep discussion, suffice to say that this movement incorporated many of the beliefs of the Communist system about workers and social rights. I think that it is fair to say that priests who were caught up in this particular heresy were more concerned about the here rather than the hearafter. Just how far these priests would have been willing to go about sermonizing on abortion, euthanasia, stem-cell research or same-sex marriages, since these were non-issues in the 1970's, I can't say. I will say, however, that I haven't seen an ultra-liberal priest or anyone else for that matter who was overly concerned about these kind of moral choices. They are, so their thinking goes, choices after all and are indicative of how the Catholic Church has gotten out of step with the modern world. I suppose that in the perfect liberal world, there would be a popular church vote and as that referendum went, so would the church.

You know, when I started this piece, I thought that I would probably come up with five or six good reasons but they really boiled down to only three. The priests who will rarely if ever preach on the demanding moral issues of the day are: Father Popular (aka Father MC), Father Money and Father Liberal. If you have one of these at your parish, then I feel your pain (really). If on the other hand you are blessed enough to have a priest who loves the Magisterium and loves you enough to tell you when you are in peril of eternal hell-fire, then you had better: A) Give thanks to God who has blessed you and your family so much and then: B) Tell Father what a good job he's doing and that you'll stand by him when everyone else is against him.

Grappling With Catholic Feng Shui

2005-05-09T11:20:00.000-07:00

Forget about whether Pope Benedict XVI will soften his attitude toward the role of women in the church or discover a more pastoral approach to homosexuals or heed the pleas of manpower-poor bishops for an experiment with married priests. For many Catholics, there is only one question about the new pope's intentions: Will he turn the altars around?

Some Catholics considerably younger than my grandmother never have reconciled themselves to what may seem to non-Catholics like a trivial dispute over furniture arrangement or, at best, a sort of Christian feng shui. But the debate over the placement of the priest at Mass is a variation on debates in many faiths between traditionalists and innovators, between those who emphasize the this-worldly nature of religion and those who are content to see dimly, looking to another world.

Where does the new pope fall along this divide? In his 1999 book "The Spirit of the Liturgy," the future pope ruefully recalls how Mass "versus populum" (toward the people) established itself after Vatican II even though Pope John XXIII's reform council hadn't directly decreed the change. The new arrangement, then-Cardinal Ratzinger sarcastically observes, was thought to be "compatible with the meaning of the Christian liturgy, with the requirement of active participation."

The conventional conservative complaint about Mass facing the people is that it "desacralizes" the Eucharist by overemphasizing its role as a meal and slighting its re-presentation, through the prayers of the priest, of Christ's sacrifice on the cross.

Ratzinger shares some of these concerns, but he also cites a different problem: Mass facing the people inflates the priest's role. "Everything depends on him," Ratzinger writes. "We have to see him, to respond to him, to know what he is doing…. Not surprisingly, people try to reduce this newly created role by assigning all kinds of liturgical functions to different individuals and entrusting the 'creative' planning of the liturgy to groups of people … to, 'make their own contribution.' Less and less is God in the picture."

Read the entire article by following the link below.

Grappling With Catholic Feng Shui

Physician Tells of Eucharistic Miracle of Lanciano

2005-05-07T08:47:00.000-07:00

In these hard times, it is good to take a break and remember that Christ is with us. Although it is better that we believe without seeing, Jesus has taken pity on us and left some proof that his words and the teachings of His Church are true. -- the editor.

Date: 2005-05-05

Physician Tells of Eucharistic Miracle of Lanciano

Edoardo Linoli Verified Authenticity of the Phenomenon

ROME, MAY 5, 2005 (Zenit.org).- Dr. Edoardo Linoli says he held real cardiac tissue in his hands, when some years ago he analyzed the relics of the Eucharistic miracle of Lanciano, Italy.

The phenomenon dates back to the eighth century. A Basilian monk, who had doubts about the real presence of Christ in the sacred species, was offering Mass, in a church dedicated to St. Legontian in the town of Lanciano.

When he pronounced the words of the consecration, the host was miraculously changed into physical flesh and the wine into physical blood.

Later the blood coagulated and the flesh remained the same. These relics were kept in the cathedral.

Linoli, a professor of anatomy and pathological histology, and of chemistry and clinical microscopy, and former head of the Laboratory of Pathological Anatomy at the Hospital of Arezzo, is the only doctor who has analyzed the relics of the miracle of Lanciano. His findings have stirred interest in the scientific world.

At the initiative of Archbishop Pacifico Perantoni of Lanciano, and of the provincial minister of the Franciscan Conventuals of Abruzzo, and with authorization from Rome, in November 1970 the Franciscans of Lanciano decided to have the relics examined scientifically.

Linoli was entrusted with the study. He was assisted by Dr. Ruggero Bertelli, retired professor of human anatomy at the University of Siena.

Linoli extracted parts of the relics with great care and then analyzed the remains of "miraculous flesh and blood." He presented his findings on March 4, 1971.

His study confirmed that the flesh and blood were of human origin. The flesh was unequivocally cardiac tissue, and the blood was of type AB.

Consulted by ZENIT, Linoli explained that "as regards the flesh, I had in my hand the endocardium. Therefore, there is no doubt at all that it is cardiac tissue."

In regard to the blood, the scientist emphasized that "the blood group is the same as that of the man of the holy Shroud of Turin, and it is particular because it has the characteristics of a man who was born and lived in the Middle East regions."

"The AB blood group of the inhabitants of the area in fact has a percentage that extends from 0.5% to 1%, while in Palestine and the regions of the Middle East it is 14-15%," Linoli said.

Linoli's analysis revealed no traces of preservatives in the elements, meaning that the blood could not have been extracted from a corpse, because it would have been rapidly altered.

Linoli's report was published in "Quaderni Sclavo di Diagnostica Clinica e di Laboratori" in 1971.

In 1973, the Higher Council of the World Health Organization (WHO) appointed a scientific commission to verify the Italian doctor's conclusions. The work was carried out over 15 months with a total of 500 examinations. The conclusions of all the researches confirmed what had been stated and published in Italy.

The extract of the scientific research of WHO's medical commission was published in New York and Geneva in 1976, confirming science's inability to explain the phenomenon.

Today, Linoli participated in a congress on Eucharistic miracles organized by the Science and Faith master's program of Rome's Regina Apostolorum Pontifical University, in cooperation with the St. Clement I Pope and Martyr Institute, on the occasion of the Year of the Eucharist under way.

"Eucharistic miracles are extraordinary phenomena of a different type," Legionary Father Rafael Pascual, director of the congress, told Vatican Radio. "For example, there is the transformation of the species of bread and wine into flesh and blood, the miraculous preservation of consecrated Hosts, and some Hosts that shed blood."

"In Italy, these miracles have occurred in several places," he said, "but we also find them in France, Germany, the Netherlands, Spain " and some in North America.