It's been a while, I know. There's more to come, but I thought I'd leave this for now for your reading pleasure. I know, I had WAY too much time on my hands when I wrote this :-). Enjoy, and Merry Christmas!
In Jesus and Mary,
Gerald
On the first day of Christmas Obama gave to me:
A fast track to bankruptcy.
On the second day of Christmas Obama gave to me:
Two losing war plans
and a fast track to bankruptcy.
On the third day of Christmas Obama gave to me:
Three networks fawning,
Two losing war plans,
and a fast track to bankruptcy.
On the fourth day of Christmas Obama gave to me:
Four years of lies,
Three networks fawning,
Two losing war plans,
and a fast track to bankruptcy.
On the fifth day of Christmas Obama gave to me:
Five Sheiks in court,
Four years of lies,
Three networks fawning,
Two losing war plans,
and a fast track to bankruptcy.
On the sixth day of Chrismas Obama gave to me:
Six polls a tanking,
Five Sheiks in court,
Four years of lies,
Three networks fawning,
Two losing war plans,
and a fast track to bankruptcy.
On the seventh day of Christmas Obama gave to me:
Seven tax hikes looming,
Six polls a tanking,
Five Sheiks in court,
Four years of lies,
Three networks fawning,
Two losing war plans,
and a fast track to bankruptcy.
On the eighth day of Christmas Obama gave to me:
Eight trips a billing,
Seven tax hikes looming,
Six polls a tanking,
Five Sheiks in court,
Four years of lies,
Three networks fawning,
Two losing war plans,
and a fast track to bankruptcy.
On the ninth day of Christmas Obama gave to me:
Nine Marxists aiding,
Eight trips a billing,
Seven tax hikes looming,
Six polls a tanking,
Five Sheiks in court,
Four years of lies,
Three networks fawning,
Two losing war plans,
and a fast track to bankruptcy.
On the tenth day of Christmas Obama gave to me:
Ten Commandments scorning,
Nine Marxists aiding,
Eight trips a billing,
Seven tax hikes looming,
Six polls a tanking,
Five Sheiks in court,
Four years of lies,
Three networks fawning,
Two losing war plans,
and a fast track to bankruptcy.
On the eleventh day of Christmas Obama gave to me:
Eleventh Chapter filing,
Ten Commandment scorning,
Nine Marxists aiding,
Eight trips a billing,
Seven tax hikes looming,
Six polls a tanking,
Five Sheiks in court,
Four years of lies,
Three networks fawning,
Two losing war plans,
and a fast track to bankruptcy.
On the twelfth day of Christmas Obama gave to me:
Twelve scandals brewing,
Eleventh Chapter filing,
Ten Commandments scorning,
Nine Marxists aiding,
Eight trips a billing,
Seven tax hikes looming,
Six polls a tanking,
Five Sheiks in court,
Four years of lies,
Three networks fawning,
Two losing war plans,
and a fast track to bankruptcy.
Thursday, December 24, 2009
Thursday, October 15, 2009
Commemorating the Feast of a Namesake Saint
I will admit that, while living in Steubenville a few years ago, I experienced a bout of jealousy over the fact that so many of my friends shared names with prominent Catholic Saints, whereas the name Gerald did not appear to stand out in this regard. This led me to do some research to see if there were, in fact, Catholic Saints named Gerald. My search proved more fruitful than I imagined, as I found at least four St. Geralds among the Church Triumphant (not counting those that also went by the alternate spelling Gerard). There was St. Gerald of Mayo, noted as a holy abbot of one of the prominent Irish monasteries of the late 7th and early 8th centuries. There was St. Gerald of Braga, the Portuguese Bishop who died in 1109 and was known for being a vocal opponent of lay investiture (the process of lay nobility appointing hand-picked candidates to ecclessial posts). And there was St. Gerald of Sauve-Majeure, a noted 11th century Benedictine monk and reformer.
There was, however, one particular St. Gerald that caught my attention, and to whom I eventually developed a devotion. As I was remiss in failing to note his feast day this past Tuesday (October 13), I would like to make mention of him now. St. Gerald of Aurillac was a French nobleman who lived during the 10th century. He is unusual among the Saints of his day in many respects, most notably in the fact that he was a layman and lived an ascetic and pious life during a period of history specially noted for the immoral excesses of its nobility. The following biographical sketch, found here, briefly describes the Saint's life and notable accomplishments.
Gerald of Aurillac, Confessor
Born 855 at Saint-Cirgues; died 909. He was of noble birth and suffered lengthy illness in his youth. For this reason, he gave much time to meditation, study, and prayer instead of the martial pursuits that ordinarily would have been expected.
When he succeeded his father as count of Aurillac in Auvergne, and owner of considerable estates, he continued his life of devotion and became noted for his piety and generosity to the poor. He was distinguished for the justice and efficiency with which he discharged the duties of a wealthy nobleman.
His personal life was no less virtuous, and markedly well-ordered and religious. He dressed modestly, ate little, rose every morning at 2:00 a.m.--even when travelling--to say the first part of the Divine Office, and then he assisted at Mass.
But it is possible that he would not have become well-known had he not founded the monastery at Aurillac. After a pilgrimage to Rome, he built a church under the invocation of Saint Peter, and, c. 890, a Benedictine abbey at Aurillac, which was to become famous when it was taken over by the Cluniac order.
He led a life of great goodness for someone of his rank during this rather immoral period in history. He considered becoming a monk at his monastery but was persuaded against it by Gausbert, the bishop of Cahors, who counseled that he would be more useful acting as a layman who devoted himself to his neighbors and dependents. He gave a great part of his revenue to the poor and endowed the monastery generously.
He was blind for the last seven years of his life. He died at Cezenac, Quercy, and was buried at his abbey. He is the patron saint of Upper Auvergne.
Saint Odo of Cluny wrote a Life of Saint Gerald that made him celebrated in medieval France. A later member of Saint Gerald of Aurillac's family was Saint Robert of Chaise-Dieu (d. 1087; canonized c. 1095) who founded the great abbey of that name in Auvergne (Attwater, Encyclopedia, Sitwell, White).
For more information about St. Gerald of Aurillac, you can visit the following links:
- The Life of St. Gerald of Aurillac - by St. Odo of Cluny, a 10th century monk whose research into the life of St. Gerald provides us with most of our extant knowledge of the Saint. This link is to a preview, so some pages are missing, but still a lot of good information.
- Entry on St. Gerald from Butler's Lives of the Saints
- Wikipedia article
As a single man still discerning his vocation and someone who has for the past seven years struggled with recurring and occasionally debilitating bouts of sciatica, I am especially attracted to St. Gerald of Aurillac as an intercessor because he has been proclaimed the patron of bachelors and the disabled. He remains a wonderful model of holiness for laity, for men that are either called to live chaste single life or still discerning a vocation, for those who struggle with disabilities (or any other obstacles that stand in the way of the fulfillment of God's will in our lives) and for those who struggle with a tendency towards materialism. For those seeking a saintly devotion, and even for those are not, I recommend this holy Frenchman as an intercessor. St. Gerald of Aurillac, pray for us! God bless!
In Jesus and Mary,
Gerald
There was, however, one particular St. Gerald that caught my attention, and to whom I eventually developed a devotion. As I was remiss in failing to note his feast day this past Tuesday (October 13), I would like to make mention of him now. St. Gerald of Aurillac was a French nobleman who lived during the 10th century. He is unusual among the Saints of his day in many respects, most notably in the fact that he was a layman and lived an ascetic and pious life during a period of history specially noted for the immoral excesses of its nobility. The following biographical sketch, found here, briefly describes the Saint's life and notable accomplishments.
Gerald of Aurillac, Confessor
Born 855 at Saint-Cirgues; died 909. He was of noble birth and suffered lengthy illness in his youth. For this reason, he gave much time to meditation, study, and prayer instead of the martial pursuits that ordinarily would have been expected.
When he succeeded his father as count of Aurillac in Auvergne, and owner of considerable estates, he continued his life of devotion and became noted for his piety and generosity to the poor. He was distinguished for the justice and efficiency with which he discharged the duties of a wealthy nobleman.
His personal life was no less virtuous, and markedly well-ordered and religious. He dressed modestly, ate little, rose every morning at 2:00 a.m.--even when travelling--to say the first part of the Divine Office, and then he assisted at Mass.
But it is possible that he would not have become well-known had he not founded the monastery at Aurillac. After a pilgrimage to Rome, he built a church under the invocation of Saint Peter, and, c. 890, a Benedictine abbey at Aurillac, which was to become famous when it was taken over by the Cluniac order.
He led a life of great goodness for someone of his rank during this rather immoral period in history. He considered becoming a monk at his monastery but was persuaded against it by Gausbert, the bishop of Cahors, who counseled that he would be more useful acting as a layman who devoted himself to his neighbors and dependents. He gave a great part of his revenue to the poor and endowed the monastery generously.
He was blind for the last seven years of his life. He died at Cezenac, Quercy, and was buried at his abbey. He is the patron saint of Upper Auvergne.
Saint Odo of Cluny wrote a Life of Saint Gerald that made him celebrated in medieval France. A later member of Saint Gerald of Aurillac's family was Saint Robert of Chaise-Dieu (d. 1087; canonized c. 1095) who founded the great abbey of that name in Auvergne (Attwater, Encyclopedia, Sitwell, White).
For more information about St. Gerald of Aurillac, you can visit the following links:
- The Life of St. Gerald of Aurillac - by St. Odo of Cluny, a 10th century monk whose research into the life of St. Gerald provides us with most of our extant knowledge of the Saint. This link is to a preview, so some pages are missing, but still a lot of good information.
- Entry on St. Gerald from Butler's Lives of the Saints
- Wikipedia article
As a single man still discerning his vocation and someone who has for the past seven years struggled with recurring and occasionally debilitating bouts of sciatica, I am especially attracted to St. Gerald of Aurillac as an intercessor because he has been proclaimed the patron of bachelors and the disabled. He remains a wonderful model of holiness for laity, for men that are either called to live chaste single life or still discerning a vocation, for those who struggle with disabilities (or any other obstacles that stand in the way of the fulfillment of God's will in our lives) and for those who struggle with a tendency towards materialism. For those seeking a saintly devotion, and even for those are not, I recommend this holy Frenchman as an intercessor. St. Gerald of Aurillac, pray for us! God bless!
In Jesus and Mary,
Gerald
Tuesday, October 6, 2009
Unveiling The Latest Weapon In The War On Terror
Granted, the Obama administration isn't putting as much money into the military these days, but the brilliant minds in the White House war room have developed a new weapon that is both cost effective and sure to strike fear into the hearts of our enemies...
Sleep well tonight, my fellow Americans. We are in good hands :-)
Sleep well tonight, my fellow Americans. We are in good hands :-)
Sunday, October 4, 2009
Happy Feast Of St. Francis And Respect Life Sunday!
It is a happy yet fitting coincidence that the two should fall on the same day this year. St. Francis is widely and properly regarded as one of the greatest lovers of life (and especially of the Author of Life) that the Church has ever produced.
Let us remember St. Francis as a lover of life, but also as someone who recognized the pre-eminent value of human life above that of all other material creatures. Let us also remember that he had above all else a deep and abiding love for God and His Church, and dedicated every waking moment of every day to furthering the truths espoused by both. It is one of the great tragedies of modern times that a city named after him by well meaning Spanish missionaries has become a hotbed of hostility towards that which St. Francis loved most. Let us then, on this day, pray for that city, and for all others who set themselves against the truth, that they may experience a true conversion of heart and stand up for the inviolability of human life; and that they may devote their lives to serving the One who created all life and gave that life meaning. God bless!
In Jesus and Mary,
Gerald
Let us remember St. Francis as a lover of life, but also as someone who recognized the pre-eminent value of human life above that of all other material creatures. Let us also remember that he had above all else a deep and abiding love for God and His Church, and dedicated every waking moment of every day to furthering the truths espoused by both. It is one of the great tragedies of modern times that a city named after him by well meaning Spanish missionaries has become a hotbed of hostility towards that which St. Francis loved most. Let us then, on this day, pray for that city, and for all others who set themselves against the truth, that they may experience a true conversion of heart and stand up for the inviolability of human life; and that they may devote their lives to serving the One who created all life and gave that life meaning. God bless!
In Jesus and Mary,
Gerald
Monday, September 21, 2009
Liturgical Abuse In Destin, FL: The Celebrant Priest Involves His Dog In the Procession
Here's the description of the video as it appears on its original Youtube page:
"After a promotion for a dog shampoo by the pastor, Fr. Thomas Guido, before Sunday Mass, this was the procession we witnessed while on our vacation in Destin, FL. The priest can be e-mailed at pastor@rcc-destin.org"
Here is the video. This really is sinking to a new low:
I'm willing to excuse abuses when the person committing the abuse is genuinely ignorant of what is being done. It is extremely difficult, however, to imagine that this pastor did not know that dogs have no place in Mass processions, or that dog shampoo has no place on an altar. Please e-mail this pastor at the address listed above, and if you are in the Tallahassee-Pensacola diocese please contact your bishop and make sure he cannot claim ignorance over this blatant disregard for liturgical norms. God bless!
In Jesus and Mary,
Gerald
"After a promotion for a dog shampoo by the pastor, Fr. Thomas Guido, before Sunday Mass, this was the procession we witnessed while on our vacation in Destin, FL. The priest can be e-mailed at pastor@rcc-destin.org"
Here is the video. This really is sinking to a new low:
I'm willing to excuse abuses when the person committing the abuse is genuinely ignorant of what is being done. It is extremely difficult, however, to imagine that this pastor did not know that dogs have no place in Mass processions, or that dog shampoo has no place on an altar. Please e-mail this pastor at the address listed above, and if you are in the Tallahassee-Pensacola diocese please contact your bishop and make sure he cannot claim ignorance over this blatant disregard for liturgical norms. God bless!
In Jesus and Mary,
Gerald
Thursday, September 17, 2009
Token Pro-Life Gesture From A Man Who Has Done Enormous Violence To The Pro-Life Cause
If Notre Dame President Father John Jenkins thinks this will succeed in whitewashing his past apostasy and allow him to curry favor with faithful Catholics, he is sorely mistaken.
That said, a journey of 10,000 miles begins with a single step, and we retain a moral obligation to pray that Fr. Jenkins will completely repudiate his past anti-Catholic behavior. God bless!
In Jesus and Mary,
Gerald
That said, a journey of 10,000 miles begins with a single step, and we retain a moral obligation to pray that Fr. Jenkins will completely repudiate his past anti-Catholic behavior. God bless!
In Jesus and Mary,
Gerald
Thursday, September 3, 2009
Announcing New Programming In EWTN's Fall Line-Up
I occasionally am sent press releases from the wonderful television apostolate EWTN to post on my blog so my readers can be advised of upcoming programs. The lineup listed below is quite an impressive one. If you don't make EWTN a part of your regular television viewing, I strongly encourage you to do so. If you do not have EWTN as part of your cable line-up, I strongly encourage you to write your cable company and ask them to add it. I would especially recommend it for those Catholics living near parishes where the Catholic faith is not being presented faithfully and accurately.
Anyway, please read the following press release, and enjoy the upcoming season of EWTN programming. God bless!
In Jesus and Mary,
Gerald
EWTN Unveils Season’s New Series
Irondale, AL (EWTN) – EWTN Global Catholic Network is proud to unveil a host of new series, which will debut in September. Start programming your DVR now so you preview the shows and find your new favorites. Here is a quick synopsis of what viewers will discover: (Editors: for high-resolution photos, please go to www.ewtn.com/media/Sept2009NewSeries)
NEW SERIES
Theater of the Word: If you love live plays, but hate the hefty price tag, join Kevin O’Brien and the actors of Theater of the Word as they bring a host of biblical and religious-themed stories to life. (Saturdays, 4 p.m. ET)
A Light for All Nations: Do you frequently wish you understood all the fuss about Vatican II? One of its most important documents was Lumen Gentium. That’s where you’ll find all the talk about the role of the laity, the “universal call to holiness,” and a lot more. If you want to “get it,” tape this new series with Fr. Brian Mullady. (Sundays at 5:30 a.m. ET and Thursdays at 11 p.m. ET)
St. Josemaria Escriva and Opus Dei: You’ve heard all the dis-information in “The DaVinci Code.” Now get the facts about the life, mission and apostolate of this great modern saint with Damon Owen and John Coverdale. (Sundays, 5 p.m. ET and Fridays at 10:30 p.m. ET)
Forgotten Heritage: Europe and the Eucharist: Learn how belief in the Eucharist actually shaped Western Culture in this exciting new series with Father Owen Gorman and Fr. John Hogan. (Sundays, 5:30 p.m. ET and Wednesdays, 11:30 p.m. ET)
CHILDREN’S PROGRAMMING
The Roamin’ Catholic: With a loveable wackiness all his own, Rob Wahl, the Roamin’ Catholic, and a penguin who lives in a freezer, traverse the globe on exciting missions of discovery that bring kids an entertaining look at the Faith (Mondays, 4:30 p.m. ET).
The Divine Mercy Chaplet for Kids: Your chidren will be enchanted with this animated special, which features St. Faustina teaching her young friends about the Divine Mercy Devotion and how to pray the Divine Mercy Chaplet. Adults may learn something too! (Fridays at 5 p.m. ET)
RETURNING TO EWTN
EWTN Cinema: Gather around the television set for a series of classic and inspiring Catholic films such as “The Road to Lourdes,” “A Time to Remember,” “Karol: the Pope, the Man,” “The Passion of Bernadette,” “The Great Mr. Handel,” and many others. (Saturdays, 8 p.m. ET)
Apostolate for Family Consecration: In this wide-ranging new series, you’ll learn about the mysteries of the Church, Sacred Scripture, papal documents and Vatican II. (Sundays at 11 a.m. ET)
NEW EPISODES
Christ In The City: How do you live a Christian life amidst the hustle and bustle of contemporary life? Gain insights from New York City Pastor Father George Rutler, STD. (Tuesdays, 11 p.m. ET).
G.K. Chesterton: Apostle of Common Sense: The President of the American Chesterton Society, Dale Ahlquist, takes viewers inside the unparalleled wit and wisdom of this popular 20th Century thinker and writer. (Sundays, 9 p.m. ET and Wednesdays, 11 a.m. ET).
Defending Life XV: Fr. Frank Pavone and Janet Morana take an up-close look at the contemporary pro-life movement in America, exploring events and activities, talking to experts, and more (Fridays, 10 p.m. ET).
EWTN Global Catholic Network, in its 28th year, is available in over 150 million television households in more than 140 countries and territories. With its direct broadcast satellite television and radio services, AM & FM radio networks, worldwide short-wave radio station, Internet website www.ewtn.com and publishing arm, EWTN, is the largest religious media network in the world.
Anyway, please read the following press release, and enjoy the upcoming season of EWTN programming. God bless!
In Jesus and Mary,
Gerald
EWTN Unveils Season’s New Series
Irondale, AL (EWTN) – EWTN Global Catholic Network is proud to unveil a host of new series, which will debut in September. Start programming your DVR now so you preview the shows and find your new favorites. Here is a quick synopsis of what viewers will discover: (Editors: for high-resolution photos, please go to www.ewtn.com/media/Sept2009NewSeries)
NEW SERIES
Theater of the Word: If you love live plays, but hate the hefty price tag, join Kevin O’Brien and the actors of Theater of the Word as they bring a host of biblical and religious-themed stories to life. (Saturdays, 4 p.m. ET)
A Light for All Nations: Do you frequently wish you understood all the fuss about Vatican II? One of its most important documents was Lumen Gentium. That’s where you’ll find all the talk about the role of the laity, the “universal call to holiness,” and a lot more. If you want to “get it,” tape this new series with Fr. Brian Mullady. (Sundays at 5:30 a.m. ET and Thursdays at 11 p.m. ET)
St. Josemaria Escriva and Opus Dei: You’ve heard all the dis-information in “The DaVinci Code.” Now get the facts about the life, mission and apostolate of this great modern saint with Damon Owen and John Coverdale. (Sundays, 5 p.m. ET and Fridays at 10:30 p.m. ET)
Forgotten Heritage: Europe and the Eucharist: Learn how belief in the Eucharist actually shaped Western Culture in this exciting new series with Father Owen Gorman and Fr. John Hogan. (Sundays, 5:30 p.m. ET and Wednesdays, 11:30 p.m. ET)
CHILDREN’S PROGRAMMING
The Roamin’ Catholic: With a loveable wackiness all his own, Rob Wahl, the Roamin’ Catholic, and a penguin who lives in a freezer, traverse the globe on exciting missions of discovery that bring kids an entertaining look at the Faith (Mondays, 4:30 p.m. ET).
The Divine Mercy Chaplet for Kids: Your chidren will be enchanted with this animated special, which features St. Faustina teaching her young friends about the Divine Mercy Devotion and how to pray the Divine Mercy Chaplet. Adults may learn something too! (Fridays at 5 p.m. ET)
RETURNING TO EWTN
EWTN Cinema: Gather around the television set for a series of classic and inspiring Catholic films such as “The Road to Lourdes,” “A Time to Remember,” “Karol: the Pope, the Man,” “The Passion of Bernadette,” “The Great Mr. Handel,” and many others. (Saturdays, 8 p.m. ET)
Apostolate for Family Consecration: In this wide-ranging new series, you’ll learn about the mysteries of the Church, Sacred Scripture, papal documents and Vatican II. (Sundays at 11 a.m. ET)
NEW EPISODES
Christ In The City: How do you live a Christian life amidst the hustle and bustle of contemporary life? Gain insights from New York City Pastor Father George Rutler, STD. (Tuesdays, 11 p.m. ET).
G.K. Chesterton: Apostle of Common Sense: The President of the American Chesterton Society, Dale Ahlquist, takes viewers inside the unparalleled wit and wisdom of this popular 20th Century thinker and writer. (Sundays, 9 p.m. ET and Wednesdays, 11 a.m. ET).
Defending Life XV: Fr. Frank Pavone and Janet Morana take an up-close look at the contemporary pro-life movement in America, exploring events and activities, talking to experts, and more (Fridays, 10 p.m. ET).
EWTN Global Catholic Network, in its 28th year, is available in over 150 million television households in more than 140 countries and territories. With its direct broadcast satellite television and radio services, AM & FM radio networks, worldwide short-wave radio station, Internet website www.ewtn.com and publishing arm, EWTN, is the largest religious media network in the world.
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
Thoughts On The Passing Of Ted Kennedy
As you are no doubt aware, 77 year-old Senator Edward "Ted" Kennedy succumbed to brain cancer today; and as expected, news programs have consisted largely of wall-to-wall coverage paying tribute to his career.
I am going to refrain from speaking ill of the dead - especially on the day of the deceased's passing - and will therefore not delve into the many reasons why I do not agree with all the praise that has been heaped upon the late Senator. The fact is, a human life was lost today, one that, like all other human lives, is unique and irreplaceable. I sincerely lament the many personal tragedies that he endured throughout his life - from seeing all three of his older brothers cut down in the prime of life (the oldest during World War II, the others by way of assassins' bullets) to the tragic deaths of numerous younger members of the family to the many scandals that plagued the Kennedy family - and also offer prayers for the repose of his soul and for the consolation of his family.
Those who have read my blog or spoken with me personally can well imagine my opinion of Ted Kennedy as a person and as a politician. Suffice it to say, I do not think that his political career is one worth celebrating. Throughout his life, Kennedy engaged in personal and political behavior that was a source of tragedy in the lives of others. To those who have been affected in such a way, I can only ask that you also offer prayers for the repose of his soul and the consolation of his family, and recall the value of forgiveness, which is not only a source of spiritual healing, but also (and more importantly) the course of action that is most pleasing to God.
I can only pray that the Senator died in a state of grace, and that by the grace and mercy of God we may one day have the opportunity to meet Senator Kennedy in the eternal Beatific Vision. God bless!
In Jesus and Mary,
Gerald
I am going to refrain from speaking ill of the dead - especially on the day of the deceased's passing - and will therefore not delve into the many reasons why I do not agree with all the praise that has been heaped upon the late Senator. The fact is, a human life was lost today, one that, like all other human lives, is unique and irreplaceable. I sincerely lament the many personal tragedies that he endured throughout his life - from seeing all three of his older brothers cut down in the prime of life (the oldest during World War II, the others by way of assassins' bullets) to the tragic deaths of numerous younger members of the family to the many scandals that plagued the Kennedy family - and also offer prayers for the repose of his soul and for the consolation of his family.
Those who have read my blog or spoken with me personally can well imagine my opinion of Ted Kennedy as a person and as a politician. Suffice it to say, I do not think that his political career is one worth celebrating. Throughout his life, Kennedy engaged in personal and political behavior that was a source of tragedy in the lives of others. To those who have been affected in such a way, I can only ask that you also offer prayers for the repose of his soul and the consolation of his family, and recall the value of forgiveness, which is not only a source of spiritual healing, but also (and more importantly) the course of action that is most pleasing to God.
I can only pray that the Senator died in a state of grace, and that by the grace and mercy of God we may one day have the opportunity to meet Senator Kennedy in the eternal Beatific Vision. God bless!
In Jesus and Mary,
Gerald
Thursday, August 20, 2009
The Mystery Of Faith Vs. The Illusion Of Control
The likes of Bill Maher, Christopher Hitchens, and Richard Dawkins constantly assure us that faith is nothing more than a form of intellectual bondage, a false illusion of something unattainable that prevents man from reaching his true intellectual potential. Faith, according to them, is something that man is supposed to outgrow as he matures.
If Maher, Hitchens, and Dawkins are what pass for mature, intellectually liberated minds, then I'm afraid the human race never really stood a chance.
There is a method to the the madness of these so-called "militant atheists." The motivation is really rather simple, in every sense of the word: since they can't discern the existence of a higher power through their senses, nor conclude that there is such an existence through their use of reason (emphasis being on their use of reason, as opposed to man's use of reason), then such an existence cannot be possible.
At least, this is what they tell themselves. That they devote so much of their lives to disproving the existence of such an entity is not indicative of a lack of believe in such an entity. Rather, it is indicative of a desire that such an entity not exist.
That's their dirty little secret: Maher, Hitchens, Dawkins, and those who think like them aren't so much convinced that God doesn't exist as they are in the process of attempting to convince themselves that He does not even as they desperately try to convince others. Why they are trying to convince themselves of this is anyone's guess. It could be that they are unsatisfied with their experience of having believed in a higher power. It could be that they don't like the idea of having to acknowledge a power greater than themselves. It could be that they don't like the thought of having to accept things on faith, which would require an acknowledgment of the limits of their imagined intellectual prowess. It could be any of these things, or it could be all these things, and many other things besides.
What is painfully clear, however, is that self-professed atheists - whether they truly do not believe in the existence of God or simply wished that God did not exist - are left with a void in their lives and in their ideology that they are constantly trying to fill. And in the process of refusing to acknowledge the existence of a higher power that asks us to surrender to His will as a condition for attaining the greatest treasure man can attain (i.e. eternal life in the presence of the Lord), then they refuse to acknowledge the need to surrender to the will of another. This leads to an obsession with controlling one's own life, because as much as man might like to think that life is a series of random events with no greater meaning, human nature still requires that we acknowledge that someone is in charge. In the absence of a higher power than ourselves, then, logic would dictate that we are in charge of ourselves. Holding this mentality, however, requires a great deal of self-deception. Given the inextricable bond between the existence of a higher power and the need for faith, it almost invariably follows that the man who refuses to acknowledge the existence of a higher power will refuse to acknowledge the need to have faith in anybody but one's self.
And yet, faith makes demands of all men, not just those who believe in a higher power. It requires us to trust to things that we simply cannot predict or control (whether we wish to acknowledge such a lack of control or not). Without faith, we'd never turn our backs to anyone, for fear of being betrayed by everyone. Without faith, we would never cross an intersection, because we could never trust that the drivers of other cars will obey the traffic laws that govern safe driving. Without faith, we could never eat food we did not prepare personally, because we would not trust others not to contaminate the food, whether by accident or design. We take so many things for granted, assuming that they will happen in a certain way because they always have happened in a certain way, such as a light always turning on when you flick the switch or a dog who knows you never biting you when you reach to pet its head. And yet, if we really stopped to think about it, as some poor souls unfortunately do, we realize that past experience is no guarantee of future performance, and we would be in a state of constant paranoia about things going constantly awry. Yet, even the paranoid person is forced to accept on faith that certain things, such as the beating of his own heart, will continue to happen, or else he would not be able to function at all.
Among many other things, faith is an acceptance of the fact that there are things beyond the grasp of both our reason and our control, and that we must entrust such things to the providence of beings who can grasp them. Otherwise, society itself would never materialize, as the cooperation between men that is so essential to the proper function of a society would be obliterated by a lack of trust between men. Like it as not, trust is a form of faith.
In a very irrational world, then, there is nothing more irrational than a conscious lack of faith, or its logical extension, which is a conscious refusal to acknowledge that we lack control over every facet of our life.
The only thing we can control is our own behavior (but not its consequences), and the irony is that the people who are most obsessed with the notion of control and who scream the loudest about being allowed to do as they please are the ones least inclined to exercise self-control. Not coincidentally, they are also the most likely to profess a lack of faith. They mistake freedom for licentiousness, and in the process they fall into the most insidious form of bondage imaginable: they become slaves to their own passions, all the while basking in the illusion that they are fully in control of themselves and experiencing true freedom.
Faith, then, is a surrender to the ultimate reality that man has only limited control over the circumstances of his life. In a world obsessed with controlling its own destiny, such surrender is seen as an action of the weak-minded and unenlightened. And that particular illusion is advanced by the likes of Bill Maher, Christopher Hitchens, and Richard Dawkins, men whose disillusionment with the concept of faith and belief in a higher power has led to delusions of the worst sort in other facets of their lives.
It's their loss. One can only hope that they will seek what they have lost before it is lost to them forever.
To paraphrase Hilaire Belloc, the mysteries of faith begin where human reason finds its limit. When seeking to understand the importance of having faith in our lives, acknowledging that fact - and understanding its implications for the level of control we can truly exercise over our own lives - is not a bad place to start. God bless!
In Jesus and Mary,
Gerald
If Maher, Hitchens, and Dawkins are what pass for mature, intellectually liberated minds, then I'm afraid the human race never really stood a chance.
There is a method to the the madness of these so-called "militant atheists." The motivation is really rather simple, in every sense of the word: since they can't discern the existence of a higher power through their senses, nor conclude that there is such an existence through their use of reason (emphasis being on their use of reason, as opposed to man's use of reason), then such an existence cannot be possible.
At least, this is what they tell themselves. That they devote so much of their lives to disproving the existence of such an entity is not indicative of a lack of believe in such an entity. Rather, it is indicative of a desire that such an entity not exist.
That's their dirty little secret: Maher, Hitchens, Dawkins, and those who think like them aren't so much convinced that God doesn't exist as they are in the process of attempting to convince themselves that He does not even as they desperately try to convince others. Why they are trying to convince themselves of this is anyone's guess. It could be that they are unsatisfied with their experience of having believed in a higher power. It could be that they don't like the idea of having to acknowledge a power greater than themselves. It could be that they don't like the thought of having to accept things on faith, which would require an acknowledgment of the limits of their imagined intellectual prowess. It could be any of these things, or it could be all these things, and many other things besides.
What is painfully clear, however, is that self-professed atheists - whether they truly do not believe in the existence of God or simply wished that God did not exist - are left with a void in their lives and in their ideology that they are constantly trying to fill. And in the process of refusing to acknowledge the existence of a higher power that asks us to surrender to His will as a condition for attaining the greatest treasure man can attain (i.e. eternal life in the presence of the Lord), then they refuse to acknowledge the need to surrender to the will of another. This leads to an obsession with controlling one's own life, because as much as man might like to think that life is a series of random events with no greater meaning, human nature still requires that we acknowledge that someone is in charge. In the absence of a higher power than ourselves, then, logic would dictate that we are in charge of ourselves. Holding this mentality, however, requires a great deal of self-deception. Given the inextricable bond between the existence of a higher power and the need for faith, it almost invariably follows that the man who refuses to acknowledge the existence of a higher power will refuse to acknowledge the need to have faith in anybody but one's self.
And yet, faith makes demands of all men, not just those who believe in a higher power. It requires us to trust to things that we simply cannot predict or control (whether we wish to acknowledge such a lack of control or not). Without faith, we'd never turn our backs to anyone, for fear of being betrayed by everyone. Without faith, we would never cross an intersection, because we could never trust that the drivers of other cars will obey the traffic laws that govern safe driving. Without faith, we could never eat food we did not prepare personally, because we would not trust others not to contaminate the food, whether by accident or design. We take so many things for granted, assuming that they will happen in a certain way because they always have happened in a certain way, such as a light always turning on when you flick the switch or a dog who knows you never biting you when you reach to pet its head. And yet, if we really stopped to think about it, as some poor souls unfortunately do, we realize that past experience is no guarantee of future performance, and we would be in a state of constant paranoia about things going constantly awry. Yet, even the paranoid person is forced to accept on faith that certain things, such as the beating of his own heart, will continue to happen, or else he would not be able to function at all.
Among many other things, faith is an acceptance of the fact that there are things beyond the grasp of both our reason and our control, and that we must entrust such things to the providence of beings who can grasp them. Otherwise, society itself would never materialize, as the cooperation between men that is so essential to the proper function of a society would be obliterated by a lack of trust between men. Like it as not, trust is a form of faith.
In a very irrational world, then, there is nothing more irrational than a conscious lack of faith, or its logical extension, which is a conscious refusal to acknowledge that we lack control over every facet of our life.
The only thing we can control is our own behavior (but not its consequences), and the irony is that the people who are most obsessed with the notion of control and who scream the loudest about being allowed to do as they please are the ones least inclined to exercise self-control. Not coincidentally, they are also the most likely to profess a lack of faith. They mistake freedom for licentiousness, and in the process they fall into the most insidious form of bondage imaginable: they become slaves to their own passions, all the while basking in the illusion that they are fully in control of themselves and experiencing true freedom.
Faith, then, is a surrender to the ultimate reality that man has only limited control over the circumstances of his life. In a world obsessed with controlling its own destiny, such surrender is seen as an action of the weak-minded and unenlightened. And that particular illusion is advanced by the likes of Bill Maher, Christopher Hitchens, and Richard Dawkins, men whose disillusionment with the concept of faith and belief in a higher power has led to delusions of the worst sort in other facets of their lives.
It's their loss. One can only hope that they will seek what they have lost before it is lost to them forever.
To paraphrase Hilaire Belloc, the mysteries of faith begin where human reason finds its limit. When seeking to understand the importance of having faith in our lives, acknowledging that fact - and understanding its implications for the level of control we can truly exercise over our own lives - is not a bad place to start. God bless!
In Jesus and Mary,
Gerald
Saturday, August 15, 2009
Musings On The Assumption Of Our Blessed Mother, Revisited
I shared my thoughts regarding this feast in a blog post dated exactly one year ago today. Please revisit that post for my thoughts. Happy Feast of the Assumption! God bless!
In Jesus and Mary,
Gerald
In Jesus and Mary,
Gerald
Thursday, August 13, 2009
The Usual "Catholic" Suspects Line Up In Support Of Obamacare
Courtesy of the always excellent Catholic Key blog.
"Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves.
You will know them by their fruits. Are grapes gathered from thorns, or figs from thistles?
So, every sound tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears evil fruit.
A sound tree cannot bear evil fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit.
Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.
Thus you will know them by their fruits."
- Matthew 7: 15-20
The rotted fruit continues its mad scramble to defend all of Obama's works while chanting "Lord, Lord" to appease those well-meaning souls who do not know any better. Do not be taken in by their deception. God bless!
In Jesus and Mary,
Gerald
"Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves.
You will know them by their fruits. Are grapes gathered from thorns, or figs from thistles?
So, every sound tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears evil fruit.
A sound tree cannot bear evil fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit.
Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.
Thus you will know them by their fruits."
- Matthew 7: 15-20
The rotted fruit continues its mad scramble to defend all of Obama's works while chanting "Lord, Lord" to appease those well-meaning souls who do not know any better. Do not be taken in by their deception. God bless!
In Jesus and Mary,
Gerald
Monday, August 3, 2009
Sunday, August 2, 2009
The Battle For Life In Health Care Reform: Catholics United Vs. Family Research Council
Link, courtesy of Catholic.org (Catholic Online).
A snippet of the above-linked article:
Chris Korzen, the Executive Director of “Catholics United” lambasted an Ad currently being aired by the "Family Research Council’s" Action arm. He accused the predominantly evangelical Pro-Life and Pro-Family group of “using abortion scare tactics to turn pro-life voters against health reform.” He added that “If the Family Research Council was truly committed to human life it would focus its efforts on ensuring that the tens of millions of Americans who currently lack heath insurance can get the care they need. This attack ad is unhelpful, untruthful, and not at all pro-life.”
Tom McClusky, a Catholic and the Senior Vice President for “FRC Action” would have none of it. He told the Catholic News Agency that “Catholics United” was either deceived or participating in deception on this critical issue, “On the issue of where in the health care legislation is abortion, Family Research Council Action agrees with Cardinal Justin Rigali, Chairman of the Pro-life Office of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops,” He cited the letter dated July 29th, 2009, from Justin Cardinal Rigali which insisted that “much needed reform must not become a vehicle for promoting an ‘abortion rights’ agenda or reversing longstanding current policies against federal abortion mandates and funding.”
There is no doubt in my mind, at least, that Catholics United is participating in the deception willingly. Their entire existence has been dedicated to deceiving faithful Catholics into supporting a decidedly un-Catholic political agenda, and to silencing those who dare to call attention to their willful deception. Ladies and gentlemen, I cannot stress this enough: Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good/Catholics United is little more than an outgrowth of the same tired movement of extreme left-wing apostasy that has plagued the Catholic Church for the last four decades, attempting to turn people away from the truth while acting under the guise of faithful Catholicism (the very definition of which they and their relativistic ideological comrades have long worked to obscure). In that sense, there is nothing truly special about them. However, they have warranted more attention of late because of their close ties to the Obama administration - four of their members now work either in Congress or within the administration itself - and the fact that their Marxist message reaches wider audiences courtesy of funding from left-wing zealots like George Soros.
Make no mistake: Planned Parenthood, NARAL, NOW, the so-called "Catholics for Choice," and other agents of the culture of death have endorsed this health care bill. Bear in mind that these groups exist solely to keep abortion legal and to expand the scope of its practice. You can bet that neither they nor any other avowed enemy of the pro-life movement - such as the aforementioned Catholics United - will ever support a political initiative that fails to do exactly that. Continue to contact your Senators and Representative, and make sure they know of the moral opposition to this legislative atrocity. God bless!
In Jesus and Mary,
Gerald
A snippet of the above-linked article:
Chris Korzen, the Executive Director of “Catholics United” lambasted an Ad currently being aired by the "Family Research Council’s" Action arm. He accused the predominantly evangelical Pro-Life and Pro-Family group of “using abortion scare tactics to turn pro-life voters against health reform.” He added that “If the Family Research Council was truly committed to human life it would focus its efforts on ensuring that the tens of millions of Americans who currently lack heath insurance can get the care they need. This attack ad is unhelpful, untruthful, and not at all pro-life.”
Tom McClusky, a Catholic and the Senior Vice President for “FRC Action” would have none of it. He told the Catholic News Agency that “Catholics United” was either deceived or participating in deception on this critical issue, “On the issue of where in the health care legislation is abortion, Family Research Council Action agrees with Cardinal Justin Rigali, Chairman of the Pro-life Office of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops,” He cited the letter dated July 29th, 2009, from Justin Cardinal Rigali which insisted that “much needed reform must not become a vehicle for promoting an ‘abortion rights’ agenda or reversing longstanding current policies against federal abortion mandates and funding.”
There is no doubt in my mind, at least, that Catholics United is participating in the deception willingly. Their entire existence has been dedicated to deceiving faithful Catholics into supporting a decidedly un-Catholic political agenda, and to silencing those who dare to call attention to their willful deception. Ladies and gentlemen, I cannot stress this enough: Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good/Catholics United is little more than an outgrowth of the same tired movement of extreme left-wing apostasy that has plagued the Catholic Church for the last four decades, attempting to turn people away from the truth while acting under the guise of faithful Catholicism (the very definition of which they and their relativistic ideological comrades have long worked to obscure). In that sense, there is nothing truly special about them. However, they have warranted more attention of late because of their close ties to the Obama administration - four of their members now work either in Congress or within the administration itself - and the fact that their Marxist message reaches wider audiences courtesy of funding from left-wing zealots like George Soros.
Make no mistake: Planned Parenthood, NARAL, NOW, the so-called "Catholics for Choice," and other agents of the culture of death have endorsed this health care bill. Bear in mind that these groups exist solely to keep abortion legal and to expand the scope of its practice. You can bet that neither they nor any other avowed enemy of the pro-life movement - such as the aforementioned Catholics United - will ever support a political initiative that fails to do exactly that. Continue to contact your Senators and Representative, and make sure they know of the moral opposition to this legislative atrocity. God bless!
In Jesus and Mary,
Gerald
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
Fraudulent Catholic Group NETWORK Supports Massive Health Care Package, Asks Faithful Catholics To Disregard "Insignificant Details"
Excellent overview of the situation, courtesy of The Catholic Key. If this blog is not part of your regular reading, it should be.
When fraudulent Catholic groups try to distract you from the "insignificant details," it is a sure sign that the devil lurks in those details. God bless!
In Jesus and Mary,
Gerald
When fraudulent Catholic groups try to distract you from the "insignificant details," it is a sure sign that the devil lurks in those details. God bless!
In Jesus and Mary,
Gerald
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
So Long, And Thanks For All The Fish!
Without going into too much detail or finger pointing, tragedy struck my household on Sunday. While giving a long-overdue cleaning to my 10 gallon aquarium, the tank's 8 occupants - 3 Eastern Australian Rainbowfish, 2 Black Phantom Tetras, 2 Black Neon Tetras, and a lone Red Serpa Tetra - were placed in a medium sized wash basin. Some water from the aquarium was placed in the basin, but was mixed in with some tap water that was not properly treated; and I have reason to believe that the residue of a certain Procter and Gamble product had not been completely rinsed from the wash basin itself.
As soon as they were put in, the largest of the rainbowfish began thrashing about; within minutes it was floating on its side, still clinging to life. It thrashed about some more, and in the process it apparently caught one of the Black Neons and sent it flying through the air into the opposite side wall of the basin. Whether it was injured by the thrashing or was already feeling the ill effects of whatever had obviously contaminated the water I could not say, but when the Black Neon landed in the water it immediately went belly up. By the time the rainbowfish stopped moving shortly thereafter, the other two rainbowfish were also thrashing about on their sides. These died less than 5 minutes later. By then the second Black Neon and the lone Red Serpa were floating upside down, having died without my even noticing it. That left the two Black Phantoms; but by the time I had prepared another container for them with treated water, one of them was floating on its side, just seconds from death. The lone surviving Black Phantom - the first fish I ever bought for the tank more than fifteen months ago - still looked healthy. I immediately put it in the new container, where it seemed to be doing alright; but when I returned a few minutes later, it too was dead.
I am not the type to treat the loss of pets on the same level as the loss of friends and family, not by a long shot. Still, these were among God's creatures, and had been living in community together for well over a year. They were very hardy fish, as I only lost two others (a second Red Serpa and a third Black Phantom) during the course of the last year. Losing all eight of them was truly unfortunate.
The lesson has been learned, as far as aquarium maintenance has been concerned. We finished cleaning the aquarium, draining it of all the old water, and refilled it and treated the new water. I let the filter run for two days, and went out to buy new fish for the tank today.
I have decided not to buy tetras again. They are beautiful fish, but they tend not to be very lively and often leave a lot food behind to pollute the tank (a problem I most definitely do not have with my goldfish aquarium). I am also not buying rainbowfish. Again, they are exceptionally beautiful fish, reflecting the full spectrum of the rainbow when properly cared for and under the proper lighting (hence their name). They are also hardy, quite lively, and are healthy eaters. Unfortunately, they grew to larger lengths than I expected, and are not good fish to buy for a 10 gallon tank. Besides that, they are arguably as messy as the goldfish; and I had tremendous difficulty keeping the aquarium clean and the water clear after introducing them to the tank.
It really boiled down to four choices for me, as far as finding fish that were aesthetically pleasing, small enough to be kept in larger numbers in a 10 gallon tank, and affordable: platies, guppies, danios, and barbs.
I considered getting platies, but I've pretty much decided that if I ever buy a smaller display tank that I would put a few platies in it, so I decided not to get any yet. Besides that, some species of platy are notorious jumpers, and my 10 gallon tank has an area back by the filter that can be exploited by suicidal fish.
I love guppies. They are playful, colorful, and you can fit quite a few of them into a 10 gallon tank safely. The problem is that "safely" is a relative term. I prefer my fish to be hardy, and guppies will die if you look at them the wrong way. I have never been able to keep any alive for more than a few months. Granted, I'm no expert - and anyone who's lived with me knows that I haven't always been the most diligent person when it comes to keeping aquariums clean (you know who you are: shut up! :-) - but even the most diligent aquarium maintainers I know tell me not to grow too attached to guppies. They are extremely fragile.
Fragile is not a term you can apply to danios. There are two species of danios I've had in the past: Zebra Danios (not the GloFish variety) and Giant Danios. If I was a betting man, I would bet on these guys surviving nuclear winter. As a child, I once had a tank with three zebras and three giants. The tank was 10 gallons and was too small for such a set up; while zebras never get bigger than an inch and a half, Giant Danios can grow to as large as 6 inches and are recommended for 20+ gallon tanks. Despite this, all six fish were still alive after two years, which was more than could be said of their ever-changing tankmates (yeah, I know, we had way too many fish in the tank; we had no clue what we were doing, which makes the danios' survivability all the more impressive). Eventually, the three zebras died within a day of each other, due to some sickness that only affected their particular species. All three Giant Danios survived for at least another year, and were still in the tank when we gave it away to relatives. Danios are great fish for a starter tank. Ultimately, though, I wanted more colorful fish, and they just didn't fit the bill.
In the end, I ended up buying 3 male Cherry Barbs. The name gives a pretty good indication of their color pattern, which occurs only among the males. They grow up to 2 inches; the three I bought are still young, and nowhere near that size. In keeping with traditional start-up rules, I'll introduce the fish into the aquarium a few at a time. In a few days, I will go back and buy 3 more. I thought about getting females, but this species breeds pretty quickly and I simply don't have enough space to house all the small fry. Once I get the next batch, I'll stop for the foreseeable future. Eventually (read: when I can afford it), I'll buy a larger tank that can support various species of schools. It would be nice to have something like that to display. For now, I'll keep the 12 gallon goldfish tank and the 10 gallon barb tank and see how they do.
And that, ladies and gentlemen, pretty much describes what I've been doing these past few days. On a related note, any job leads (especially Church-related job leads) in the greater Jacksonville area would be most appreciated :-) God bless!
In Jesus and Mary,
Gerald
As soon as they were put in, the largest of the rainbowfish began thrashing about; within minutes it was floating on its side, still clinging to life. It thrashed about some more, and in the process it apparently caught one of the Black Neons and sent it flying through the air into the opposite side wall of the basin. Whether it was injured by the thrashing or was already feeling the ill effects of whatever had obviously contaminated the water I could not say, but when the Black Neon landed in the water it immediately went belly up. By the time the rainbowfish stopped moving shortly thereafter, the other two rainbowfish were also thrashing about on their sides. These died less than 5 minutes later. By then the second Black Neon and the lone Red Serpa were floating upside down, having died without my even noticing it. That left the two Black Phantoms; but by the time I had prepared another container for them with treated water, one of them was floating on its side, just seconds from death. The lone surviving Black Phantom - the first fish I ever bought for the tank more than fifteen months ago - still looked healthy. I immediately put it in the new container, where it seemed to be doing alright; but when I returned a few minutes later, it too was dead.
I am not the type to treat the loss of pets on the same level as the loss of friends and family, not by a long shot. Still, these were among God's creatures, and had been living in community together for well over a year. They were very hardy fish, as I only lost two others (a second Red Serpa and a third Black Phantom) during the course of the last year. Losing all eight of them was truly unfortunate.
The lesson has been learned, as far as aquarium maintenance has been concerned. We finished cleaning the aquarium, draining it of all the old water, and refilled it and treated the new water. I let the filter run for two days, and went out to buy new fish for the tank today.
I have decided not to buy tetras again. They are beautiful fish, but they tend not to be very lively and often leave a lot food behind to pollute the tank (a problem I most definitely do not have with my goldfish aquarium). I am also not buying rainbowfish. Again, they are exceptionally beautiful fish, reflecting the full spectrum of the rainbow when properly cared for and under the proper lighting (hence their name). They are also hardy, quite lively, and are healthy eaters. Unfortunately, they grew to larger lengths than I expected, and are not good fish to buy for a 10 gallon tank. Besides that, they are arguably as messy as the goldfish; and I had tremendous difficulty keeping the aquarium clean and the water clear after introducing them to the tank.
It really boiled down to four choices for me, as far as finding fish that were aesthetically pleasing, small enough to be kept in larger numbers in a 10 gallon tank, and affordable: platies, guppies, danios, and barbs.
I considered getting platies, but I've pretty much decided that if I ever buy a smaller display tank that I would put a few platies in it, so I decided not to get any yet. Besides that, some species of platy are notorious jumpers, and my 10 gallon tank has an area back by the filter that can be exploited by suicidal fish.
I love guppies. They are playful, colorful, and you can fit quite a few of them into a 10 gallon tank safely. The problem is that "safely" is a relative term. I prefer my fish to be hardy, and guppies will die if you look at them the wrong way. I have never been able to keep any alive for more than a few months. Granted, I'm no expert - and anyone who's lived with me knows that I haven't always been the most diligent person when it comes to keeping aquariums clean (you know who you are: shut up! :-) - but even the most diligent aquarium maintainers I know tell me not to grow too attached to guppies. They are extremely fragile.
Fragile is not a term you can apply to danios. There are two species of danios I've had in the past: Zebra Danios (not the GloFish variety) and Giant Danios. If I was a betting man, I would bet on these guys surviving nuclear winter. As a child, I once had a tank with three zebras and three giants. The tank was 10 gallons and was too small for such a set up; while zebras never get bigger than an inch and a half, Giant Danios can grow to as large as 6 inches and are recommended for 20+ gallon tanks. Despite this, all six fish were still alive after two years, which was more than could be said of their ever-changing tankmates (yeah, I know, we had way too many fish in the tank; we had no clue what we were doing, which makes the danios' survivability all the more impressive). Eventually, the three zebras died within a day of each other, due to some sickness that only affected their particular species. All three Giant Danios survived for at least another year, and were still in the tank when we gave it away to relatives. Danios are great fish for a starter tank. Ultimately, though, I wanted more colorful fish, and they just didn't fit the bill.
In the end, I ended up buying 3 male Cherry Barbs. The name gives a pretty good indication of their color pattern, which occurs only among the males. They grow up to 2 inches; the three I bought are still young, and nowhere near that size. In keeping with traditional start-up rules, I'll introduce the fish into the aquarium a few at a time. In a few days, I will go back and buy 3 more. I thought about getting females, but this species breeds pretty quickly and I simply don't have enough space to house all the small fry. Once I get the next batch, I'll stop for the foreseeable future. Eventually (read: when I can afford it), I'll buy a larger tank that can support various species of schools. It would be nice to have something like that to display. For now, I'll keep the 12 gallon goldfish tank and the 10 gallon barb tank and see how they do.
And that, ladies and gentlemen, pretty much describes what I've been doing these past few days. On a related note, any job leads (especially Church-related job leads) in the greater Jacksonville area would be most appreciated :-) God bless!
In Jesus and Mary,
Gerald
Once Again: This, Ladies And Gentlemen, Is Who Represents My Home District - Now With Subtitles!
I posted this once before, but I believe the subtitles make the point more vividly. A few reminders are in order:
- This is not a guest speaker. This is the duly-elected United States Representative of what is arguably the most heavily gerrymandered district in the country. Her votes actually make a difference when it comes to determining the extent of government intervention in health care and private industry. Not surprisingly, she is squarely in the Obama camp on virtually every issue.
- She has both a bachelor's and master's degree from Florida A&M University, a specialty certificate from the University of Florida (which does not technically make her a UF alum, but that does not stop her from making that claim), and was on the faculty at Edward Waters College in Jacksonville. Keep that in mind when you watch the video and see the extent of her grasp of the English language.
- The woman loves to claim the moral high ground when she takes a public stance on any issue, especially with regards to matters of race and alleged Republican voter fraud (though she is certainly not above being racially insensitive towards others, and has remained conspicuously silent regarding the many lawsuits filed against former Obama employer ACORN for voter fraud in at least 13 states). Despite her frequent and embarrassing displays of righteous indignation, she has been investigated by the House Ethics Committee enough times to make John Gotti blush. More information is available here and here.
That's enough to establish a consistent pattern of embarrassing behavior for the time being. Now on to the main event, an encore performance of her speech "gradulating" the "Florida Gatas" for their "gusty" play and their "BS-BCS" title in football. Now enhanced with subtitles. If you are in a silly mood, enjoy! If you are not, have some Ibuprofen ready. This is going to be painful to watch!
- This is not a guest speaker. This is the duly-elected United States Representative of what is arguably the most heavily gerrymandered district in the country. Her votes actually make a difference when it comes to determining the extent of government intervention in health care and private industry. Not surprisingly, she is squarely in the Obama camp on virtually every issue.
- She has both a bachelor's and master's degree from Florida A&M University, a specialty certificate from the University of Florida (which does not technically make her a UF alum, but that does not stop her from making that claim), and was on the faculty at Edward Waters College in Jacksonville. Keep that in mind when you watch the video and see the extent of her grasp of the English language.
- The woman loves to claim the moral high ground when she takes a public stance on any issue, especially with regards to matters of race and alleged Republican voter fraud (though she is certainly not above being racially insensitive towards others, and has remained conspicuously silent regarding the many lawsuits filed against former Obama employer ACORN for voter fraud in at least 13 states). Despite her frequent and embarrassing displays of righteous indignation, she has been investigated by the House Ethics Committee enough times to make John Gotti blush. More information is available here and here.
That's enough to establish a consistent pattern of embarrassing behavior for the time being. Now on to the main event, an encore performance of her speech "gradulating" the "Florida Gatas" for their "gusty" play and their "BS-BCS" title in football. Now enhanced with subtitles. If you are in a silly mood, enjoy! If you are not, have some Ibuprofen ready. This is going to be painful to watch!
Wednesday, July 22, 2009
Danville, VA TEA Party Leader Asks Attorney General To Investigate Use Of State Police And County Sheriff's Deputies To Harass Perriello Critics
Link
The Perriello described above is Tom Perriello, the recently-elected Democrat U.S. Congressman from Virginia's 5th Congressional District and a very ardent supporter of Obama and his health care plan (which now includes key provisions of the pro-abortion Freedom of Choice Act). The above link details the extent of the intimidation tactics Danville TEA Party leaders suspect Perriello of having engaged in, prompting the query to the state Attorney General's office.
Support for the Democrats' socialized health care plan is beginning to drop like a lead weight, and Obama and the Democrat Congressional leadership are desperate to ram the bill through Congress - with minimal scrutiny - before that support evaporates altogether. Whether or not this desperation entails using local law enforcement to intimidate vocal opponents of Obamacare is, in my humble opinion, a matter worth investigating. It is certainly more worthy of investigation than the accusations of ethics violations leveled at soon-to-be former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin (who has been cleared of 19 such accusations so far with no shred of evidence of wrongdoing uncovered to date; and she now stands to be acquitted of a 20th impending charge, which like the nineteen before it is being investigated well, well beyond reasonable doubt at taxpayer expense).
This case drew my attention for another reason. Tom Perriello is a long-time "Catholic" dissident agitator, and yet another of the driving forces behind the twin-headed apostate entity/leftist front group that is Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good/Catholics United (which campaigned quite vigorously on Perriello's behalf during the 2008 election cycle). It should be noted that in his brief time in office, Perriello has amassed a 0% rating by the National Right to Life Committee. He voted in favor of public funding for abortions in the District of Columbia (H.R. 3170). He also voted for the Foreign Relations Authorization Act (H.R. 2410), which includes a provision authorizing an "Office for Global Women's Issues," which would use U.S. taxpayer funding for abortions abroad. Though these votes have almost surely put Perriello in the good graces of NARAL, that pro-abortion entity has yet to compile pro-abortion ratings for this Congress.
This shows, yet again, that those who try to argue that Obama's agenda is in line with Catholic doctrine are far more willing to compromise the doctrinal integrity of latter in order to preserve the ideological purity of the former. God bless!
In Jesus and Mary,
Gerald
The Perriello described above is Tom Perriello, the recently-elected Democrat U.S. Congressman from Virginia's 5th Congressional District and a very ardent supporter of Obama and his health care plan (which now includes key provisions of the pro-abortion Freedom of Choice Act). The above link details the extent of the intimidation tactics Danville TEA Party leaders suspect Perriello of having engaged in, prompting the query to the state Attorney General's office.
Support for the Democrats' socialized health care plan is beginning to drop like a lead weight, and Obama and the Democrat Congressional leadership are desperate to ram the bill through Congress - with minimal scrutiny - before that support evaporates altogether. Whether or not this desperation entails using local law enforcement to intimidate vocal opponents of Obamacare is, in my humble opinion, a matter worth investigating. It is certainly more worthy of investigation than the accusations of ethics violations leveled at soon-to-be former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin (who has been cleared of 19 such accusations so far with no shred of evidence of wrongdoing uncovered to date; and she now stands to be acquitted of a 20th impending charge, which like the nineteen before it is being investigated well, well beyond reasonable doubt at taxpayer expense).
This case drew my attention for another reason. Tom Perriello is a long-time "Catholic" dissident agitator, and yet another of the driving forces behind the twin-headed apostate entity/leftist front group that is Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good/Catholics United (which campaigned quite vigorously on Perriello's behalf during the 2008 election cycle). It should be noted that in his brief time in office, Perriello has amassed a 0% rating by the National Right to Life Committee. He voted in favor of public funding for abortions in the District of Columbia (H.R. 3170). He also voted for the Foreign Relations Authorization Act (H.R. 2410), which includes a provision authorizing an "Office for Global Women's Issues," which would use U.S. taxpayer funding for abortions abroad. Though these votes have almost surely put Perriello in the good graces of NARAL, that pro-abortion entity has yet to compile pro-abortion ratings for this Congress.
This shows, yet again, that those who try to argue that Obama's agenda is in line with Catholic doctrine are far more willing to compromise the doctrinal integrity of latter in order to preserve the ideological purity of the former. God bless!
In Jesus and Mary,
Gerald
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
FOCA Never Went Away, Obama Is Just Trying To Pass It Under The Table With The Rest Of His Agenda
Link
There is no nice way to put it: the abortion agenda is a demonic one. Those who advocate it serve the forces of darkness, whether they realize it or not. And as with any other action instigated by or (unwittingly) on behalf of the forces of darkness, those who initiate the action scurry like cockroaches the moment light is shed on their actions.
I would hope that by now people have become painfully aware of just how brazenly dishonest Obama was in claiming that he would run "the most transparent administration in our nation's history." Shed a spotlight on any aspect of the Obama agenda, and there are bound to be more than a few cockroaches ready to scatter. Only this time, those cockroaches seek to do grave and irreparable harm to the cause of preserving innocent, unborn life.
Shed EVERY spotlight you can on the massive financial and moral disaster that is the proposed "Obamacare" bill. Popular support for this is fast beginning to wane, but the sad reality is that no amount of popular opposition can change the fact that Obama has a majority in both Houses of Congress. Generalized opposition is not enough. Call, write, or fax your Senators and Congressman to vote against this abomination. They have to be made vividly aware of the political consequences of supporting this legislation. Calling attention to the above link is a good first step. God bless!
In Jesus and Mary,
Gerald
There is no nice way to put it: the abortion agenda is a demonic one. Those who advocate it serve the forces of darkness, whether they realize it or not. And as with any other action instigated by or (unwittingly) on behalf of the forces of darkness, those who initiate the action scurry like cockroaches the moment light is shed on their actions.
I would hope that by now people have become painfully aware of just how brazenly dishonest Obama was in claiming that he would run "the most transparent administration in our nation's history." Shed a spotlight on any aspect of the Obama agenda, and there are bound to be more than a few cockroaches ready to scatter. Only this time, those cockroaches seek to do grave and irreparable harm to the cause of preserving innocent, unborn life.
Shed EVERY spotlight you can on the massive financial and moral disaster that is the proposed "Obamacare" bill. Popular support for this is fast beginning to wane, but the sad reality is that no amount of popular opposition can change the fact that Obama has a majority in both Houses of Congress. Generalized opposition is not enough. Call, write, or fax your Senators and Congressman to vote against this abomination. They have to be made vividly aware of the political consequences of supporting this legislation. Calling attention to the above link is a good first step. God bless!
In Jesus and Mary,
Gerald
Monday, July 20, 2009
Hey There Obama (Drink The Kool Aid)
OK, this video was created by a 16 year old and is starting to do the rounds on the blogosphere and on Facebook. It's too hilarious not to post. Enjoy!
Sunday, July 19, 2009
Great Prolife Witness
As reported by The Catholic Key blog. An amazing read about the impact of children in our lives - no matter how long they grace us with their presence. God bless!
In Jesus and Mary,
Gerald
In Jesus and Mary,
Gerald
Friday, July 17, 2009
My Take On The Obama Birth Certificate Controversy
When stories first began to break in October 2008 about a lawsuit filed in Pennsylvania by a former Hillary Clinton supporter questioning Obama's citizenship and asking him to provide an original copy of his birth certificate, I paid it little mind.
When similar lawsuits popped up in a dozen other states in the days leading up to and following the 2008 election, I started to take a casual interest in the affair. Still, I did not expect much to come of it.
When I made a passing reference to the controversy while blogging on the night of the election and promptly received the first negative comment in the then five month history of my blog, I was amused.
When I saw how the Obama campaign - and later the Obama administration - responded to the brewing controversy, and saw how fanatically devoted Obama supporters were to discouraging inquiries into the circumstances of Obama's birth (and shouting down the inquiries that did arise), I started to seriously wonder if something was amiss.
When I repeatedly commented about the difference between a long-form birth certificate - such as this 1963 Hawaii Certificate of Live Birth which lists the hospital where the birth took place and the name of the attending physician - and the short form Certification of Live Birth provided by the Obama campaign (which does not list the hospital of birth or the name of the attending physician), only to be answered by Obama supporters who invariably ignored the distinction and sent me links to either Obama's FightTheSmears.com website (since taken down) or the FactCheck.org article that supposedly dispels the rumor (without adequately addressing the distinction made above), I began to realize that the Obama camp really, really wanted this issue to go away.
Any parent with a shred of common sense knows the telltale signs that their child is hiding something, even if the parent does not necessarily know what is being hidden. Any parent with a shred of common sense also knows when their child is making a partial concession to a demand for the truth - by revealing non-incriminating or partially incriminating information - in the hopes that the parent will not inquire into the matter any further.
The fact is, I did not take the birth certificate controversy seriously until I saw the lengths the Obama administration had gone to to avoid releasing the long form birth certificate which lists the hospital where he was born and the name of the attending physician. The Obama camp contested the original Pennsylvania lawsuit, and continues to actively fight the myriad of lawsuits that have arisen in other states asking for the same information. And recently, an Army Reserve Major by the name of Stefan Frederick Cook filed a lawsuit contesting his deployment orders to Afghanistan on the grounds that Obama lacks the standing to issue such an order because he has never provided incontrovertible proof of his U.S. citizenship. The day before the date set for the case to go court (July 16th), Major Cook's deployment orders were mysteriously canceled without any explanation being offered for such a highly irregular action. When it became clear that Major Cook and his attorney were going to press on with the lawsuit, the Department of Defense pressured Major Cook's private employer to fire him (the employer confirmed that the pressure came from the Department of Defense). The lawsuit has since been dismissed on the grounds that the original reason for the lawsuit - Major Cook's imminent deployment - was no longer at issue.
I want to be clear about something, for the sake of anyone who decides to draw attention away from the main point of this blog post by starting a comment thread with a tit-for-tat breakdown of whether or not Barack Obama was born in Kenya or Hawaii and what is or is not Hawaii law. My contention with this controversy boils down to one point, and one point only: Obama can make this entire controversy go away by producing an original copy of the long form birth certificate, showing the name of the hospital and the name of the attending physician who delivered baby Barack. Not the Certification of Live Birth document that has been circulating for nearly two years and which lacks the name of the hospital where he was born and the name of the attending physician who delivered him, but the actual long form Certificate of Live Birth. If he produces this document, and it proves he was born in Hawaii, then I will be satisfied and let the matter rest. Until he produces this document, and stops wasting massive amounts of taxpayer dollars resisting all efforts to publicly disclose this document, I will question what Barack Hussein Obama II and those serving in his administration have to hide. God bless!
In Jesus and Mary,
Gerald
When similar lawsuits popped up in a dozen other states in the days leading up to and following the 2008 election, I started to take a casual interest in the affair. Still, I did not expect much to come of it.
When I made a passing reference to the controversy while blogging on the night of the election and promptly received the first negative comment in the then five month history of my blog, I was amused.
When I saw how the Obama campaign - and later the Obama administration - responded to the brewing controversy, and saw how fanatically devoted Obama supporters were to discouraging inquiries into the circumstances of Obama's birth (and shouting down the inquiries that did arise), I started to seriously wonder if something was amiss.
When I repeatedly commented about the difference between a long-form birth certificate - such as this 1963 Hawaii Certificate of Live Birth which lists the hospital where the birth took place and the name of the attending physician - and the short form Certification of Live Birth provided by the Obama campaign (which does not list the hospital of birth or the name of the attending physician), only to be answered by Obama supporters who invariably ignored the distinction and sent me links to either Obama's FightTheSmears.com website (since taken down) or the FactCheck.org article that supposedly dispels the rumor (without adequately addressing the distinction made above), I began to realize that the Obama camp really, really wanted this issue to go away.
Any parent with a shred of common sense knows the telltale signs that their child is hiding something, even if the parent does not necessarily know what is being hidden. Any parent with a shred of common sense also knows when their child is making a partial concession to a demand for the truth - by revealing non-incriminating or partially incriminating information - in the hopes that the parent will not inquire into the matter any further.
The fact is, I did not take the birth certificate controversy seriously until I saw the lengths the Obama administration had gone to to avoid releasing the long form birth certificate which lists the hospital where he was born and the name of the attending physician. The Obama camp contested the original Pennsylvania lawsuit, and continues to actively fight the myriad of lawsuits that have arisen in other states asking for the same information. And recently, an Army Reserve Major by the name of Stefan Frederick Cook filed a lawsuit contesting his deployment orders to Afghanistan on the grounds that Obama lacks the standing to issue such an order because he has never provided incontrovertible proof of his U.S. citizenship. The day before the date set for the case to go court (July 16th), Major Cook's deployment orders were mysteriously canceled without any explanation being offered for such a highly irregular action. When it became clear that Major Cook and his attorney were going to press on with the lawsuit, the Department of Defense pressured Major Cook's private employer to fire him (the employer confirmed that the pressure came from the Department of Defense). The lawsuit has since been dismissed on the grounds that the original reason for the lawsuit - Major Cook's imminent deployment - was no longer at issue.
I want to be clear about something, for the sake of anyone who decides to draw attention away from the main point of this blog post by starting a comment thread with a tit-for-tat breakdown of whether or not Barack Obama was born in Kenya or Hawaii and what is or is not Hawaii law. My contention with this controversy boils down to one point, and one point only: Obama can make this entire controversy go away by producing an original copy of the long form birth certificate, showing the name of the hospital and the name of the attending physician who delivered baby Barack. Not the Certification of Live Birth document that has been circulating for nearly two years and which lacks the name of the hospital where he was born and the name of the attending physician who delivered him, but the actual long form Certificate of Live Birth. If he produces this document, and it proves he was born in Hawaii, then I will be satisfied and let the matter rest. Until he produces this document, and stops wasting massive amounts of taxpayer dollars resisting all efforts to publicly disclose this document, I will question what Barack Hussein Obama II and those serving in his administration have to hide. God bless!
In Jesus and Mary,
Gerald
Wednesday, July 15, 2009
Obama's Science Czar: Further Proof Of The Relationship Between The Environmentalist Lobby And The Population Control Movement
Link, courtesy of LifeSiteNews.com. Hat tip to my brother.
I cringe every time legislation related to "environmental concerns" is proposed under a pro-abortion regime. Always check the fine print of such legislation, because it's bound to include provisions that threaten the sanctity of human life. To those who think there is no connection: consider yourself warned. God bless!
In Jesus and Mary,
Gerald
I cringe every time legislation related to "environmental concerns" is proposed under a pro-abortion regime. Always check the fine print of such legislation, because it's bound to include provisions that threaten the sanctity of human life. To those who think there is no connection: consider yourself warned. God bless!
In Jesus and Mary,
Gerald
Monday, July 13, 2009
My Verdict
It is my judgment that Sonia Sotomayor's confirmation to the U.S. Supreme Court would be an assault on American jurisprudence. I expect that my background as a wise Latino conservative will help me make a better determination on this matter than a bunch of white liberals who lack the richness of my experience.
Thursday, July 9, 2009
More Than 10,000 Illinois Prisoners Face Early Release To Alleviate State Budget
Link
In unrelated news, Chicago mayor Richard M. Daley has announced plans to stimulate job growth in his city by hiring 10,000 new employees within his administration...
In unrelated news, Chicago mayor Richard M. Daley has announced plans to stimulate job growth in his city by hiring 10,000 new employees within his administration...
Saturday, July 4, 2009
Cardinal John Henry Newman To Be Beatified
Hat tip to Whispers In The Loggia.
I hope that on the happy occasion of Newman's beatification, the multitude of Newman Clubs on college campuses around the country will recall the Cardinal's evangelical zeal and mirror that zeal in their activities, rather than remain the over-glorified social networking organizations that so many of them have sadly become. God bless!
In Jesus and Mary,
Gerald
I hope that on the happy occasion of Newman's beatification, the multitude of Newman Clubs on college campuses around the country will recall the Cardinal's evangelical zeal and mirror that zeal in their activities, rather than remain the over-glorified social networking organizations that so many of them have sadly become. God bless!
In Jesus and Mary,
Gerald
Happy 4th Of July!
"These are the times that try men's souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he that stands it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph. What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly: it is dearness only that gives every thing its value. Heaven knows how to put a proper price upon its goods; and it would be strange indeed if so celestial an article as freedom should not be highly rated."
- Thomas Paine, The American Crisis
Over the last few posts, I have alluded to America being far from perfect, and far from being the salvation of mankind. That said, this country has been a powerful force for good for more than 2 centuries, even if the men tasked with running this country have been far from perfect. The American experiment is a thing worth preserving, if only for as long as God allows. On this day, let us remember the principles upon which this country was founded, and recall the heroic sacrifice of the countless men and women who gave their lives to preserve those principles. Let us do what we can to honor their sacrifice, and to preserve the principles - so beautifully outlined in the Declaration of Independence and the Preamble of the U.S. Constitution - for which they bled. God bless America!
In Jesus and Mary,
Gerald
- Thomas Paine, The American Crisis
Over the last few posts, I have alluded to America being far from perfect, and far from being the salvation of mankind. That said, this country has been a powerful force for good for more than 2 centuries, even if the men tasked with running this country have been far from perfect. The American experiment is a thing worth preserving, if only for as long as God allows. On this day, let us remember the principles upon which this country was founded, and recall the heroic sacrifice of the countless men and women who gave their lives to preserve those principles. Let us do what we can to honor their sacrifice, and to preserve the principles - so beautifully outlined in the Declaration of Independence and the Preamble of the U.S. Constitution - for which they bled. God bless America!
In Jesus and Mary,
Gerald
Wednesday, July 1, 2009
Al Franken Declared Winner Of Minnesota Senate Race, Democrats Now Have Filibuster-Proof Majority In The Senate: How Will Americans Respond?
The worst-case scenario of the 2008 election has now come to pass. God help us all. I say that as a prayer, and not as a lamentation.
There is every reason to cry foul about the election results in Minnesota, where incumbent Republican Norm Coleman led after the initial counting of ballots by more than 700 votes, only to see that lead evaporate as new votes were "discovered" all over the state, with a highly disproportionate (some would say statistically impossible) number of those votes favoring Franken. The suspicious recount and horribly bungled subsequent canvassing process were chronicled in a great National Review article by Powerline's Scott Johnson.
The election results aside, we now have to face the dire consequences. In a blog post dated October 6, 2008, I warned of the following potential consequences of an Obama White House, a Nancy Pelosi-led House of Representatives, and a Harry Reid-led, filibuster-proof Senate:
"- All abortion restrictions will be overturned courtesy of the demonically misnamed "Freedom of Choice Act"
- Ruth Ginsburg, John Paul Stevens, and possibly even David Souter could retire within those two years, leaving Obama to name their replacements, who are sure to get sped through the Senate with little to no vetting, costing the pro-life movement what is likely to be the only opportunity to achieve a pro-life Supreme Court majority for the next generation.
- It is very likely that an effort to codify gay marriage into federal law will be attempted, and the next two years would be the best chance for such a codification to succeed.
- Embryonic stem cell research will receive massive federal funding, ensuring that this practice will continue well beyond our lifetimes.
- There is a good chance that Obama and Congress will attempt to pass numerous pieces of subversive legislation of the sort that will make it easier for groups like ACORN (which Obama worked for during his community organizing days, and whose members he helped train in the very tactics that have gotten many of them indicted for voter fraud in 7 states) to act in secrecy and with relative impunity, paving the way for massive voter fraud in future elections which will lead to a built-in handicap working against Republicans and conservative initiatives at the ballot box.
- Taxes. Taxes. Taxes. Did I forget to mention the possibility of taxes? Any financial crisis we think we might be facing today will pale in comparison to what is sure to follow if jobs are lost courtesy of over-taxation of businesses, if gas prices shoot up due to newly-imposed drilling bans, and if the disastrous subsidies for ethanol-based fuel continue to drive food prices through the roof.
- Government oversight over private enterprise will grow, as will government oversight of first amendment rights. Can you imagine Democrats having no obstacle to passing laws that would make it possible for Catholic priests to get arrested as accessories if they preach against homosexuality during Mass and one of that priest's parishioners subsequently commits any act perceived as criminal or discriminatory against someone they may or may not have known to be homosexual? When government imposes itself in any area of private life, history has shown that it is not so easily pushed out again.
- The abominable "Fairness Doctrine" - designed specifically to drive conservative talk radio (the one media outlet liberals don't have a monopoly on apart from the Internet) out of business - is sure to be revisited and snuck through Congress with as little fanfare as possible."
Some of the things described above - including Souter's retirement, massive tax increases, increasing government oversight of private industry, and the beginnings of federal attempts to suppress ideological dissent - have already come to pass (and as expected, Democrats are trying to speed Obama's Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor through the confirmation process with minimal scrutiny), and these things have happened without the assurance of a filibuster-proof Democrat majority as everyone waited for the Minnesota shenanigans to play out. Now, with the filibuster-proof majority assured, the Democrats still have 16 months before the next mid-term congressional election - to say nothing of the additional two month period between the elections themselves and the swearing in of the newly-elected - in which time they can push through the rest of the above-mentioned agenda (and much else besides) with minimal Republican resistance.
Only one obstacle remains to the imminent attempt to run roughshod over our civil liberties, and that is the voice of the would-be downtrodden: namely, we the American people. As a general rule, politicians are set in their political agenda, and rarely listen to their constituents once the votes have been tallied and they have been assured of election (or re-election, as the case may be). However, public outcry very nearly derailed HR 2454 (the disastrous cap and trade legislation) in the House (the margin of passage being only 7 votes), and stands a good chance of derailing the legislation in the Senate - even with a filibuster-proof Democrat majority. Public pressure is also the only hope we now have of derailing the passage of the financially catastrophic "Obamacare" health care proposal, as well as forestalling the inevitable attempts at gun control. Politicians tend ignore isolated outcries from constituents whose opinions differ from their own. However, they find it a great deal more difficult to ignore massive public outcries, especially these days if said politicians face re-election in 2010.
Congressmen often have the luxury of relative anonymity when casting their votes. We know that the self-proclaimed "most transparent administration in U.S. history" is not going to go out of its way to explain the consequences of the legislation it favors, so it falls to us to exhort our Senators and Representatives to familiarize themselves with the legislation for which they are casting a vote - and to hold them accountable for running afoul of the American people when they fail to act in our best interests. Public exposure of those who vote in favor of disastrous legislation or against beneficial legislation is warranted. That, however, is not possible unless we the people bother to familiarize ourselves with the mechanisms of government and the wording and practical applications of the legislation that passes through the halls of Congress.
Which means, folks, that we cannot continue to remain in ignorant bliss of what our government is doing. Ignorant voters tend to elect the most capable con artists to high office, and then tend to turn a blind eye to the mischief such con artists perpetrate. If we truly care about this American experiment, that has to stop. The right to vote carries with it a grave moral responsibility. Not only do we have an obligation to familiarize ourselves with the candidates and amendments that appear on our ballots, we also have an obligation to ensure that our elected officials remain on good behavior and that the amendments we vote into law are properly enacted. To do otherwise, and to remain ignorant of what we enable at the ballot box, is to ensure the advent of tyranny.
We are now at a crossroads. We must decide if the American experiment is worth saving. If we can't be bothered to inform ourselves about the agenda of the people now tasked with perpetuating that experiment, and to hold them accountable to us, we may soon wake up to the realization that the vision of our Founding Fathers has passed us by. And we will have no one to blame but ourselves. God bless!
In Jesus and Mary,
Gerald
There is every reason to cry foul about the election results in Minnesota, where incumbent Republican Norm Coleman led after the initial counting of ballots by more than 700 votes, only to see that lead evaporate as new votes were "discovered" all over the state, with a highly disproportionate (some would say statistically impossible) number of those votes favoring Franken. The suspicious recount and horribly bungled subsequent canvassing process were chronicled in a great National Review article by Powerline's Scott Johnson.
The election results aside, we now have to face the dire consequences. In a blog post dated October 6, 2008, I warned of the following potential consequences of an Obama White House, a Nancy Pelosi-led House of Representatives, and a Harry Reid-led, filibuster-proof Senate:
"- All abortion restrictions will be overturned courtesy of the demonically misnamed "Freedom of Choice Act"
- Ruth Ginsburg, John Paul Stevens, and possibly even David Souter could retire within those two years, leaving Obama to name their replacements, who are sure to get sped through the Senate with little to no vetting, costing the pro-life movement what is likely to be the only opportunity to achieve a pro-life Supreme Court majority for the next generation.
- It is very likely that an effort to codify gay marriage into federal law will be attempted, and the next two years would be the best chance for such a codification to succeed.
- Embryonic stem cell research will receive massive federal funding, ensuring that this practice will continue well beyond our lifetimes.
- There is a good chance that Obama and Congress will attempt to pass numerous pieces of subversive legislation of the sort that will make it easier for groups like ACORN (which Obama worked for during his community organizing days, and whose members he helped train in the very tactics that have gotten many of them indicted for voter fraud in 7 states) to act in secrecy and with relative impunity, paving the way for massive voter fraud in future elections which will lead to a built-in handicap working against Republicans and conservative initiatives at the ballot box.
- Taxes. Taxes. Taxes. Did I forget to mention the possibility of taxes? Any financial crisis we think we might be facing today will pale in comparison to what is sure to follow if jobs are lost courtesy of over-taxation of businesses, if gas prices shoot up due to newly-imposed drilling bans, and if the disastrous subsidies for ethanol-based fuel continue to drive food prices through the roof.
- Government oversight over private enterprise will grow, as will government oversight of first amendment rights. Can you imagine Democrats having no obstacle to passing laws that would make it possible for Catholic priests to get arrested as accessories if they preach against homosexuality during Mass and one of that priest's parishioners subsequently commits any act perceived as criminal or discriminatory against someone they may or may not have known to be homosexual? When government imposes itself in any area of private life, history has shown that it is not so easily pushed out again.
- The abominable "Fairness Doctrine" - designed specifically to drive conservative talk radio (the one media outlet liberals don't have a monopoly on apart from the Internet) out of business - is sure to be revisited and snuck through Congress with as little fanfare as possible."
Some of the things described above - including Souter's retirement, massive tax increases, increasing government oversight of private industry, and the beginnings of federal attempts to suppress ideological dissent - have already come to pass (and as expected, Democrats are trying to speed Obama's Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor through the confirmation process with minimal scrutiny), and these things have happened without the assurance of a filibuster-proof Democrat majority as everyone waited for the Minnesota shenanigans to play out. Now, with the filibuster-proof majority assured, the Democrats still have 16 months before the next mid-term congressional election - to say nothing of the additional two month period between the elections themselves and the swearing in of the newly-elected - in which time they can push through the rest of the above-mentioned agenda (and much else besides) with minimal Republican resistance.
Only one obstacle remains to the imminent attempt to run roughshod over our civil liberties, and that is the voice of the would-be downtrodden: namely, we the American people. As a general rule, politicians are set in their political agenda, and rarely listen to their constituents once the votes have been tallied and they have been assured of election (or re-election, as the case may be). However, public outcry very nearly derailed HR 2454 (the disastrous cap and trade legislation) in the House (the margin of passage being only 7 votes), and stands a good chance of derailing the legislation in the Senate - even with a filibuster-proof Democrat majority. Public pressure is also the only hope we now have of derailing the passage of the financially catastrophic "Obamacare" health care proposal, as well as forestalling the inevitable attempts at gun control. Politicians tend ignore isolated outcries from constituents whose opinions differ from their own. However, they find it a great deal more difficult to ignore massive public outcries, especially these days if said politicians face re-election in 2010.
Congressmen often have the luxury of relative anonymity when casting their votes. We know that the self-proclaimed "most transparent administration in U.S. history" is not going to go out of its way to explain the consequences of the legislation it favors, so it falls to us to exhort our Senators and Representatives to familiarize themselves with the legislation for which they are casting a vote - and to hold them accountable for running afoul of the American people when they fail to act in our best interests. Public exposure of those who vote in favor of disastrous legislation or against beneficial legislation is warranted. That, however, is not possible unless we the people bother to familiarize ourselves with the mechanisms of government and the wording and practical applications of the legislation that passes through the halls of Congress.
Which means, folks, that we cannot continue to remain in ignorant bliss of what our government is doing. Ignorant voters tend to elect the most capable con artists to high office, and then tend to turn a blind eye to the mischief such con artists perpetrate. If we truly care about this American experiment, that has to stop. The right to vote carries with it a grave moral responsibility. Not only do we have an obligation to familiarize ourselves with the candidates and amendments that appear on our ballots, we also have an obligation to ensure that our elected officials remain on good behavior and that the amendments we vote into law are properly enacted. To do otherwise, and to remain ignorant of what we enable at the ballot box, is to ensure the advent of tyranny.
We are now at a crossroads. We must decide if the American experiment is worth saving. If we can't be bothered to inform ourselves about the agenda of the people now tasked with perpetuating that experiment, and to hold them accountable to us, we may soon wake up to the realization that the vision of our Founding Fathers has passed us by. And we will have no one to blame but ourselves. God bless!
In Jesus and Mary,
Gerald
Monday, June 29, 2009
This Is Just Getting Pathetic
On Friday, the House of Representatives voted to pass House Resolution 2454 (the so-called "clean energy" or "climate change" bill, better known as "cap and trade") by a 219-212 vote, with 44 Democrats voting against it and 8 Republicans voting in favor of it (thus providing the highly unfortunate margin of passage). The Senate is likely to address the bill in September after the summer recess (the most eagerly awaited congressional recess in American history), and there is considerable doubt as to whether or not the bill will pass the Senate.
Folks, I can't tell you how disastrous this legislation would be, both from an economic and a moral standpoint. This bill would essentially empower the government to regulate our energy expenditures. It would cause energy costs to skyrocket, as Obama himself admitted in the following clip:
House Minority Leader John Boehner spent nearly an hour addressing this legislative travesty before the Friday vote, countering Nancy Pelosi's blatantly dishonest claim that this legislation would create more jobs. Among the things Boehner addressed was an amendment to the bill that would require home owners to subject their homes to a government-mandated environmental inspection which they are required to pass before the government will allow them to sell their homes. Amendments like these are scattered throughout the bill, and are a bald-faced attempt to restrict private property rights.
As to the issue of jobs, the bill would uphold the ban on domestic drilling, and would pave the way for further dependence on foreign oil. The list goes on and on. And as if we needed any further proof of how disastrous this legislation would be, there is one further fairly dependable gauge to go by: the leftist political front group and fraudulently-named Catholics United supports it. That alone should be enough to set off warning bells in the heads of any God-fearing, freedom-loving human being.
The financial consequences of a move towards a totalitarian socialism aside, we cannot overlook the frightening possibilities of what a newly-empowered, Obama-led government might do in the area of population control in the name of "saving the earth." China's forced abortion policy is largely the result of that barbaric regime trying to regulate the consumption of resources. What's to stop Obama - a demonically devoted opponent of the pro-life cause - from deciding that America's population needs to be capped at a certain level in order to preserve this nation's resources (many of which are ironically closed to us thanks to the provisions of this cap-and-trade legislation?). This is a dirty little secret of the environmental movement. All of the major environmental lobbyists in Washington - including the Sierra Club, the World Wildlife Fund, and Greenpeace - all hold official stances in favor of regulating population growth, ostensibly because the earth can only sustain so many people at one time (which might be true, though we are nowhere near that threshold and are not likely to reach it any time in the foreseeable future). This is not, as some have claimed, the views of only a small segment of the environmental movement. It is part of the lobby's agenda. And this cap and trade bill would be a step towards the fulfillment of that agenda.
It is highly imperative that our Senators be made aware of our displeasure with this legislative abomination. Let your Senators know that if and when they address this come September, their stance on this bill will go a long way towards determining their future electoral prospects. As my brother pointed out in a recent blog post, if the cap and trade legislation becomes law, Friday, June 26th, 2009 may well be the day that history regards as the day the American experiment failed. Brothers and sisters in Christ, America is not the great salvation of mankind, but among the world powers it is the closest thing to an ally that the forces of good have. Let us then preserve this experiment for as long as we can. God bless!
In Jesus and Mary,
Gerald
Folks, I can't tell you how disastrous this legislation would be, both from an economic and a moral standpoint. This bill would essentially empower the government to regulate our energy expenditures. It would cause energy costs to skyrocket, as Obama himself admitted in the following clip:
House Minority Leader John Boehner spent nearly an hour addressing this legislative travesty before the Friday vote, countering Nancy Pelosi's blatantly dishonest claim that this legislation would create more jobs. Among the things Boehner addressed was an amendment to the bill that would require home owners to subject their homes to a government-mandated environmental inspection which they are required to pass before the government will allow them to sell their homes. Amendments like these are scattered throughout the bill, and are a bald-faced attempt to restrict private property rights.
As to the issue of jobs, the bill would uphold the ban on domestic drilling, and would pave the way for further dependence on foreign oil. The list goes on and on. And as if we needed any further proof of how disastrous this legislation would be, there is one further fairly dependable gauge to go by: the leftist political front group and fraudulently-named Catholics United supports it. That alone should be enough to set off warning bells in the heads of any God-fearing, freedom-loving human being.
The financial consequences of a move towards a totalitarian socialism aside, we cannot overlook the frightening possibilities of what a newly-empowered, Obama-led government might do in the area of population control in the name of "saving the earth." China's forced abortion policy is largely the result of that barbaric regime trying to regulate the consumption of resources. What's to stop Obama - a demonically devoted opponent of the pro-life cause - from deciding that America's population needs to be capped at a certain level in order to preserve this nation's resources (many of which are ironically closed to us thanks to the provisions of this cap-and-trade legislation?). This is a dirty little secret of the environmental movement. All of the major environmental lobbyists in Washington - including the Sierra Club, the World Wildlife Fund, and Greenpeace - all hold official stances in favor of regulating population growth, ostensibly because the earth can only sustain so many people at one time (which might be true, though we are nowhere near that threshold and are not likely to reach it any time in the foreseeable future). This is not, as some have claimed, the views of only a small segment of the environmental movement. It is part of the lobby's agenda. And this cap and trade bill would be a step towards the fulfillment of that agenda.
It is highly imperative that our Senators be made aware of our displeasure with this legislative abomination. Let your Senators know that if and when they address this come September, their stance on this bill will go a long way towards determining their future electoral prospects. As my brother pointed out in a recent blog post, if the cap and trade legislation becomes law, Friday, June 26th, 2009 may well be the day that history regards as the day the American experiment failed. Brothers and sisters in Christ, America is not the great salvation of mankind, but among the world powers it is the closest thing to an ally that the forces of good have. Let us then preserve this experiment for as long as we can. God bless!
In Jesus and Mary,
Gerald
Thursday, June 25, 2009
Amnesty International Demands No Amnesty For The Unborn
A great read from Piero A. Tozzi of the Catholic Human Rights and Family Institute (C-FAM) regarding Amnesty International's harsh criticism of the nation of Poland for its failure to have more liberalized abortion laws. And so another so-called "human rights" group proves itself fraudulent.
For years, Amnesty International studiously avoided taking a stance on the abortion issue while promoting social justice causes. The organization has long been known to have left-leaning political sympathies, but always wanted to maintain some measure of support from Christian organizations on commonly-held human rights issues by not running afoul of them on the abortion issue. As such, it served as a magnet for individuals who were adamantly opposed to war and capital punishment but who were ambivalent when it came to the rights of the unborn, and refused to divulge their true opinions on the abortion issue out of a desire to maintain an air of legitimacy in pro-life circles (Sr. Helen Prejean being a very prominent example, though whether or not she ever enjoyed legitimacy within the pro-life community is highly debatable).
That time has now passed, and Amnesty International has joined the long line of self-proclaimed "human rights" organizations with clear anti-life and anti-Christian sympathies. And, as this article once again shows, when it comes to enemies of the pro-life position, abortion is not merely a matter of choice. Either you cave in and support abortion without restrictions, or you are branded an opponent of human rights and become part of the only entity aside from Israel that the U.N. vigorously condemns with any measure of regularity. Go figure.
I've known a great many good pro-life people over the years who have supported Amnesty International precisely because they refused to come out in favor of abortion. If you know of any people who continue to give such support, please send the above article to them so they can see that Amnesty International has voluntarily removed itself from the category of organizations deserving of our support, and has done so with extreme prejudice. God bless!
In Jesus and Mary,
Gerald
For years, Amnesty International studiously avoided taking a stance on the abortion issue while promoting social justice causes. The organization has long been known to have left-leaning political sympathies, but always wanted to maintain some measure of support from Christian organizations on commonly-held human rights issues by not running afoul of them on the abortion issue. As such, it served as a magnet for individuals who were adamantly opposed to war and capital punishment but who were ambivalent when it came to the rights of the unborn, and refused to divulge their true opinions on the abortion issue out of a desire to maintain an air of legitimacy in pro-life circles (Sr. Helen Prejean being a very prominent example, though whether or not she ever enjoyed legitimacy within the pro-life community is highly debatable).
That time has now passed, and Amnesty International has joined the long line of self-proclaimed "human rights" organizations with clear anti-life and anti-Christian sympathies. And, as this article once again shows, when it comes to enemies of the pro-life position, abortion is not merely a matter of choice. Either you cave in and support abortion without restrictions, or you are branded an opponent of human rights and become part of the only entity aside from Israel that the U.N. vigorously condemns with any measure of regularity. Go figure.
I've known a great many good pro-life people over the years who have supported Amnesty International precisely because they refused to come out in favor of abortion. If you know of any people who continue to give such support, please send the above article to them so they can see that Amnesty International has voluntarily removed itself from the category of organizations deserving of our support, and has done so with extreme prejudice. God bless!
In Jesus and Mary,
Gerald
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
Obama Betrays Pro-Abortion Hypocrisy In Father's Day Reflections
I don't know where to begin with this one. Practically everything Obama says in his Father's Day message is contradicted by his policy stances.
You can click here for Obama's full statement in Parade.com. However, two excerpts immediately stand out as bearing explanation in light of how they square (or rather, fail to square) with Obama's policy decisions.
Obama writes: "That is why we need fathers to step up, to realize that their job does not end at conception; that what makes you a man is not the ability to have a child but the courage to raise one.
As fathers, we need to be involved in our children’s lives not just when it’s convenient or easy, and not just when they’re doing well—but when it’s difficult and thankless, and they’re struggling. That is when they need us most."
Interesting. Is President Obama admitting that life begins at conception? When did that determination suddenly fall within his pay grade? Is it within a President's pay grade? Is a President qualified to determine when life begins? Because it seems to me that this President didn't exactly trust the judgment of his predecessor on the issue, having made it a priority to reverse said predecessor's abortion-related policies.
Obama speaks about the importance of being there for a child and being man enough to raise the child. Yet his every policy position regarding the unborn essentially regards a "good father" as one that pays to have the child destroyed by an abortionist. Obama says it takes courage to raise a child, but it is hard to muster such courage when there is no child to raise, which is an unfortunate side effect of choosing to kill a child rather than raise it - with Obama's full blessing, of course.
And if the child was targeted for abortion but manages to be born alive anyway, there's no need for paternal courage in that case either. The President absolves you of any parental responsibility towards such a child. As far as Obama is concerned, you can let the doctor lock the child in a storage closet to die alone and unattended. Unlike Obama, you don't even need to be "present."
Obama speaks of men doing the difficult and thankless tasks with regards to their children, and to being there when the children struggle and need them most. Yet there is no more difficult and thankless aspect to fatherhood than to see the mother of your child through her pregnancy, and the baby's greatest struggle is to survive the period of time when uncaring judicial activists unilaterally declared - wisely, in Obama's view - that it was legal to kill it. It is during this uncertain time that a child needs the love of a mother and a father most. Yet despite Obama's statements in Parade.com, he has dedicated himself during his entire political career to ensuring that you don't have to worry about being a father during this time. No, in Obama's professional judgment, the child needs you most when neither judicial activists nor cold-hearted legislators (among whom can be counted a certain former state senator in Illinois) can legally justify its murder any longer. When a baby not previously targeted for abortion is fully delivered and has had its umbilical chord cut, then and only then does Obama say that you better be a dad. You see, at that point the "stop telling me what to do with my body!" fallacy so often used as a justification for abortion can no longer be logically sustained by even the most illogical minds, and Obama no longer risks incurring Planned Parenthood's or NOW's wrath. Until that point, however...baby, schmaby. You can jab a pair of scissors into the back of its neck, for all he cares.
Obama writes: "We need to realize that we are our children’s first and best teachers. When we are selfish or inconsiderate, when we mistreat our wives or girlfriends, when we cut corners or fail to control our tempers, our children learn from that—and it’s no surprise when we see those behaviors in our schools or on our streets."
Careful, Mr. President, you risk alienating one of your most devoted voting blocs.
Some questions, Mr. President:
- If we are our children's first and best teachers, why not speak out in support of homeschooling? After all, if the first and best teachers can be legally certified to educate a child, why should the child still be forced to go to a public school? Why go with an inferior educator when the best teacher is already available and home?
- Why turn a blind eye to legislation that prevents parents from pulling children out of the classroom when sex education is being taught? Why not trust parents, as the first and best teachers, to teach their children more effectively about the birds and the bees than some government-funded, condom-bearing drone?
- And if you are truly serious about the importance of a father in a child's life, why give a man like Kevin Jennings a post in the Department of Education? The man pushes a radical homosexual agenda, part of which is forcing society to accept homosexual unions as being on par with heterosexual marriage. He also pushes for compulsory extension of adoption services to homosexual couples (probably to offset the fact that homosexual unions cannot produce children naturally, despite this being one of the chief functions of those heterosexual marriages that homosexual unions are supposedly on par with). This would necessarily include allowing lesbian couples to adopt, and that scenario would preclude the presence of a father in the adopted child's life. Did you think through the consequences of this incredibly poor appointment? Or are you simply telling those leery of your moral agenda what you think they want to hear?
You see, Obama talks a good talk. He even gave an infamous "Just Words?" speech to deflect criticism of the fact that much of what he says is just words. I guess you can add this recent exercise in hypocrisy to that list.
Actions speak louder than words, Mr. President. You can only drown out your actions for so long before people start to recognize the vapid nature of your empty rhetoric. So either stop insulting our intelligence or make sure your actions don't completely contradict that stream of eloquent diction that scrolls through your teleprompter. God bless!
In Jesus and Mary,
Gerald
You can click here for Obama's full statement in Parade.com. However, two excerpts immediately stand out as bearing explanation in light of how they square (or rather, fail to square) with Obama's policy decisions.
Obama writes: "That is why we need fathers to step up, to realize that their job does not end at conception; that what makes you a man is not the ability to have a child but the courage to raise one.
As fathers, we need to be involved in our children’s lives not just when it’s convenient or easy, and not just when they’re doing well—but when it’s difficult and thankless, and they’re struggling. That is when they need us most."
Interesting. Is President Obama admitting that life begins at conception? When did that determination suddenly fall within his pay grade? Is it within a President's pay grade? Is a President qualified to determine when life begins? Because it seems to me that this President didn't exactly trust the judgment of his predecessor on the issue, having made it a priority to reverse said predecessor's abortion-related policies.
Obama speaks about the importance of being there for a child and being man enough to raise the child. Yet his every policy position regarding the unborn essentially regards a "good father" as one that pays to have the child destroyed by an abortionist. Obama says it takes courage to raise a child, but it is hard to muster such courage when there is no child to raise, which is an unfortunate side effect of choosing to kill a child rather than raise it - with Obama's full blessing, of course.
And if the child was targeted for abortion but manages to be born alive anyway, there's no need for paternal courage in that case either. The President absolves you of any parental responsibility towards such a child. As far as Obama is concerned, you can let the doctor lock the child in a storage closet to die alone and unattended. Unlike Obama, you don't even need to be "present."
Obama speaks of men doing the difficult and thankless tasks with regards to their children, and to being there when the children struggle and need them most. Yet there is no more difficult and thankless aspect to fatherhood than to see the mother of your child through her pregnancy, and the baby's greatest struggle is to survive the period of time when uncaring judicial activists unilaterally declared - wisely, in Obama's view - that it was legal to kill it. It is during this uncertain time that a child needs the love of a mother and a father most. Yet despite Obama's statements in Parade.com, he has dedicated himself during his entire political career to ensuring that you don't have to worry about being a father during this time. No, in Obama's professional judgment, the child needs you most when neither judicial activists nor cold-hearted legislators (among whom can be counted a certain former state senator in Illinois) can legally justify its murder any longer. When a baby not previously targeted for abortion is fully delivered and has had its umbilical chord cut, then and only then does Obama say that you better be a dad. You see, at that point the "stop telling me what to do with my body!" fallacy so often used as a justification for abortion can no longer be logically sustained by even the most illogical minds, and Obama no longer risks incurring Planned Parenthood's or NOW's wrath. Until that point, however...baby, schmaby. You can jab a pair of scissors into the back of its neck, for all he cares.
Obama writes: "We need to realize that we are our children’s first and best teachers. When we are selfish or inconsiderate, when we mistreat our wives or girlfriends, when we cut corners or fail to control our tempers, our children learn from that—and it’s no surprise when we see those behaviors in our schools or on our streets."
Careful, Mr. President, you risk alienating one of your most devoted voting blocs.
Some questions, Mr. President:
- If we are our children's first and best teachers, why not speak out in support of homeschooling? After all, if the first and best teachers can be legally certified to educate a child, why should the child still be forced to go to a public school? Why go with an inferior educator when the best teacher is already available and home?
- Why turn a blind eye to legislation that prevents parents from pulling children out of the classroom when sex education is being taught? Why not trust parents, as the first and best teachers, to teach their children more effectively about the birds and the bees than some government-funded, condom-bearing drone?
- And if you are truly serious about the importance of a father in a child's life, why give a man like Kevin Jennings a post in the Department of Education? The man pushes a radical homosexual agenda, part of which is forcing society to accept homosexual unions as being on par with heterosexual marriage. He also pushes for compulsory extension of adoption services to homosexual couples (probably to offset the fact that homosexual unions cannot produce children naturally, despite this being one of the chief functions of those heterosexual marriages that homosexual unions are supposedly on par with). This would necessarily include allowing lesbian couples to adopt, and that scenario would preclude the presence of a father in the adopted child's life. Did you think through the consequences of this incredibly poor appointment? Or are you simply telling those leery of your moral agenda what you think they want to hear?
You see, Obama talks a good talk. He even gave an infamous "Just Words?" speech to deflect criticism of the fact that much of what he says is just words. I guess you can add this recent exercise in hypocrisy to that list.
Actions speak louder than words, Mr. President. You can only drown out your actions for so long before people start to recognize the vapid nature of your empty rhetoric. So either stop insulting our intelligence or make sure your actions don't completely contradict that stream of eloquent diction that scrolls through your teleprompter. God bless!
In Jesus and Mary,
Gerald
Saturday, June 20, 2009
While I Was Sleeping...
My apologies for the delays in posting. Truth is, I just got caught up in other things. Not especially important things, I'm afraid. But I guess we all go through phases where we are easily diverted.
Nevertheless, it has been an eventful few weeks in the world. The events in Iran have especially dominated the news of late. While I express my deepest sympathies and solidarity with the brave Iranians protesting the results of an obviously rigged election, I marvel that people can express shock at the fact that the election was, in fact, rigged. Expressing shock at a fraudulent display of democracy by a murderous dictatorial regime is akin to expressing shock at Keith Olbermann for making a fool of himself. You expect the snake to bite: it's inherent to its nature. As the old adage goes: "Never trust a snake." And while this world has more than its fair share of snakes - and more than its fair share of them in positions of power - few are more adept at crawling on their bellies than Mahmoud Ahmadenijad and the Ayatollah Khameini.
On the domestic front, Barack Obama continues to name left fringe crazies to high ranking positions within his administration. Two recent examples especially stand out in this regard. On the education front, he has very quietly nominated militant gay activist Kevin Jennings as Assistant Deputy Secretary for the Office of Safe and Drug Free Schools. Jennings has a long track record of trying to push a sexually deviant agenda through the public school system, and is a vocal advocate of homosexual indoctrination starting in kindergarten. More on the nomination - and Obama's general use of the press to divert attention away from his prolific nomination of radical leftists to key government posts - can be found in this great Townhall piece by Kevin McCullough.
The second nomination that caught my eye has been the subject of a rather humorous subplot in the past few weeks. Alexia Kelley, who is one of the core members of the apostate left wing front group Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good, was appointed by Obama as Director of Faith-based and Community Partnerships at the Department of Health and Human Services (Kelley, by the way, is the fourth person associated with Catholics in Alliance/Catholics United to be appointed by Obama to a government post, and all 4 appointments are widely recognized as political payback for help during Obama's presidential campaign. Yet Catholics in Alliance/Catholics United laughably continue to hold themselves out as nonpartisan entities). The humor arises from the fact that shortly after the appointment was made, John O'Brien, successor to the semi-retired and hardly lamented Frances Kissling as head of the militantly pro-abortion and bitterly anti-Catholic group Catholics for Choice (formerly Catholics for a Free Choice. Why these groups think that name changes will rehabilitate their images is really quite beyond me) issued a statement calling the appointment a "defeat for reason and logic" on the grounds that Alexia Kelley was allegedly pro-life. This prompted a response from James Salt of Catholics United accusing Catholics for Choice of "joining the far right" in launching vicious unfounded smears against Kelley (the statement was posted on the Catholics United website, but has since been removed), after which Kissling herself joined the fray. Jack Smith wrote an excellent piece covering Kissling's confused response on The Catholic Key blog.
Two things strike me as humorous in this entire exchange. First is the mistaken notion that Alexia Kelley - or anyone else involved with Catholics in Alliance/Catholics United - holds pro-life views. The two entities hold themselves out as pro-life, but consistently support pro-abortion politicians. Not only that, they quite viciously attack pro-life politicians who dare oppose their candidates and office-holders of choice. They pay a great deal of lip service to supporting politicians who "work to reduce the number of abortions," yet studiously avoid supporting a single politician who advocates the one action guaranteed to reduce the number of abortions: namely, making abortion illegal.
The second thing is this: there is no unity in heresy or apostasy. Unity comes only through adherence to the truth. Dissenting groups tend to fall under large umbrella organizations, and the best-known dissenters tend to be involved in multiple groups. There is so much overlap that, generally speaking, one dissident organization is indistinguishable from another. But having so many different group names creates the impression that the movement of dissent is far bigger than it really is. The virtually identical natures of Catholics in Alliance/Catholics United are but one example. In that sense, such groups are rightly considered unified, and they certainly do organize together in most of their endeavors to create the illusion of larger numbers for their projects.
However, each dissident group - while generally supportive of the overall agenda of dismantling the hierarchical nature of the Church and replacing it with a faux democracy steeped in the values of moral relativism - tends to embrace one or two pet causes, whether it be promoting abortion, contraception, the acceptance of homosexual behavior, liberation theology, etc. It happens in rare occasions that one or more of those causes come into direct conflict, and that is what happened here. Catholics in Alliance/Catholics United promotes itself as pro-life in order to gain support among poorly informed but well-meaning Catholics for its aggressive pursuit of a socialist form of government. In doing this, they ran afoul of Catholics for (a Free) Choice, which has in the past compared the Vatican to the Taliban for its supposed oppression of women because of its pro-life positions (and yes, they made this comparison with a straight face, which should give you some insight as to just how disturbingly demonic the ideology of this group truly is). When Catholics for (a Free) Choice hears anyone identify themselves as pro-life, they don't check to verify the authenticity of the claim. They instead fly into full-blown panic mode at the prospect that such individuals will save the life of even one unborn child with their policy decisions. And so a dishonest pretension by Catholics in Alliance/Catholics United led to an amusing side show that left egg on the faces of two different dissident factions.
One other thing I've noticed is just how selective Catholics in Alliance/Catholics United is in its criticisms. Catholics for (a Free) Choice is at least consistent in that it will bash anyone who expresses the slightest concern for the plight of the unborn, however sick and disturbing such an approach may be. Catholics United, on the other hand, claims to champion the cause of peace and justice, but only ever seems to criticize the pro-life movement, those who criticize Barack Obama, and those who dare criticize any of Catholics in Alliance/Catholics United's core members. They also made it a point to "lament" the murder of Dr. George Tiller, but it seems they only did this as an excuse to take a pot shot at the pro-life movement. Yet when it comes to things like speaking out in support of the oppressed people in Iran, denouncing the slave trade in the Sudan, or addressing human rights abuses in China, all you hear are crickets chirping. I guess Obama needs to address those issues first, so Catholics in Alliance/Catholics United can receive their talking points from him - or rather, his teleprompter.
Regarding the murder of Dr. George Tiller, which also happened since my last blog post, I will share two statements I issued on my Facebook page concerning the incident. Besides expressing my utter disgust with how the Obama administration has chosen to use this tragedy as a means of marginalizing the pro-life movement, I will let these two statements reflect my thoughts on the matter until new developments arise:
"George Tiller's murder was certainly beyond the pale, but so is using that murder as an excuse to score cheap political points at the pro-life movement's expense."
"The murder of George Tiller was an atrocity. It was morally unjustifiable, and I will have words with anyone who says otherwise. But let no one dare insult my intelligence by pretending he is a martyr for humanitarian causes. There are approximately 60,000 reasons why I vehemently beg to differ."
Lastly, to those of you who have sent me e-mails regarding my blog, I'd like to say thank you. Even though I have not had the chance to reply to each of you individually, just know that your comments are appreciated, and I do plan to address some of the issues raised in your e-mails. And no, I am not on Twitter, and don't plan to be at this time, though that might change at a later date. Please keep the feedback coming. I pray this post finds each of you well. God bless!
In Jesus and Mary,
Gerald
Nevertheless, it has been an eventful few weeks in the world. The events in Iran have especially dominated the news of late. While I express my deepest sympathies and solidarity with the brave Iranians protesting the results of an obviously rigged election, I marvel that people can express shock at the fact that the election was, in fact, rigged. Expressing shock at a fraudulent display of democracy by a murderous dictatorial regime is akin to expressing shock at Keith Olbermann for making a fool of himself. You expect the snake to bite: it's inherent to its nature. As the old adage goes: "Never trust a snake." And while this world has more than its fair share of snakes - and more than its fair share of them in positions of power - few are more adept at crawling on their bellies than Mahmoud Ahmadenijad and the Ayatollah Khameini.
On the domestic front, Barack Obama continues to name left fringe crazies to high ranking positions within his administration. Two recent examples especially stand out in this regard. On the education front, he has very quietly nominated militant gay activist Kevin Jennings as Assistant Deputy Secretary for the Office of Safe and Drug Free Schools. Jennings has a long track record of trying to push a sexually deviant agenda through the public school system, and is a vocal advocate of homosexual indoctrination starting in kindergarten. More on the nomination - and Obama's general use of the press to divert attention away from his prolific nomination of radical leftists to key government posts - can be found in this great Townhall piece by Kevin McCullough.
The second nomination that caught my eye has been the subject of a rather humorous subplot in the past few weeks. Alexia Kelley, who is one of the core members of the apostate left wing front group Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good, was appointed by Obama as Director of Faith-based and Community Partnerships at the Department of Health and Human Services (Kelley, by the way, is the fourth person associated with Catholics in Alliance/Catholics United to be appointed by Obama to a government post, and all 4 appointments are widely recognized as political payback for help during Obama's presidential campaign. Yet Catholics in Alliance/Catholics United laughably continue to hold themselves out as nonpartisan entities). The humor arises from the fact that shortly after the appointment was made, John O'Brien, successor to the semi-retired and hardly lamented Frances Kissling as head of the militantly pro-abortion and bitterly anti-Catholic group Catholics for Choice (formerly Catholics for a Free Choice. Why these groups think that name changes will rehabilitate their images is really quite beyond me) issued a statement calling the appointment a "defeat for reason and logic" on the grounds that Alexia Kelley was allegedly pro-life. This prompted a response from James Salt of Catholics United accusing Catholics for Choice of "joining the far right" in launching vicious unfounded smears against Kelley (the statement was posted on the Catholics United website, but has since been removed), after which Kissling herself joined the fray. Jack Smith wrote an excellent piece covering Kissling's confused response on The Catholic Key blog.
Two things strike me as humorous in this entire exchange. First is the mistaken notion that Alexia Kelley - or anyone else involved with Catholics in Alliance/Catholics United - holds pro-life views. The two entities hold themselves out as pro-life, but consistently support pro-abortion politicians. Not only that, they quite viciously attack pro-life politicians who dare oppose their candidates and office-holders of choice. They pay a great deal of lip service to supporting politicians who "work to reduce the number of abortions," yet studiously avoid supporting a single politician who advocates the one action guaranteed to reduce the number of abortions: namely, making abortion illegal.
The second thing is this: there is no unity in heresy or apostasy. Unity comes only through adherence to the truth. Dissenting groups tend to fall under large umbrella organizations, and the best-known dissenters tend to be involved in multiple groups. There is so much overlap that, generally speaking, one dissident organization is indistinguishable from another. But having so many different group names creates the impression that the movement of dissent is far bigger than it really is. The virtually identical natures of Catholics in Alliance/Catholics United are but one example. In that sense, such groups are rightly considered unified, and they certainly do organize together in most of their endeavors to create the illusion of larger numbers for their projects.
However, each dissident group - while generally supportive of the overall agenda of dismantling the hierarchical nature of the Church and replacing it with a faux democracy steeped in the values of moral relativism - tends to embrace one or two pet causes, whether it be promoting abortion, contraception, the acceptance of homosexual behavior, liberation theology, etc. It happens in rare occasions that one or more of those causes come into direct conflict, and that is what happened here. Catholics in Alliance/Catholics United promotes itself as pro-life in order to gain support among poorly informed but well-meaning Catholics for its aggressive pursuit of a socialist form of government. In doing this, they ran afoul of Catholics for (a Free) Choice, which has in the past compared the Vatican to the Taliban for its supposed oppression of women because of its pro-life positions (and yes, they made this comparison with a straight face, which should give you some insight as to just how disturbingly demonic the ideology of this group truly is). When Catholics for (a Free) Choice hears anyone identify themselves as pro-life, they don't check to verify the authenticity of the claim. They instead fly into full-blown panic mode at the prospect that such individuals will save the life of even one unborn child with their policy decisions. And so a dishonest pretension by Catholics in Alliance/Catholics United led to an amusing side show that left egg on the faces of two different dissident factions.
One other thing I've noticed is just how selective Catholics in Alliance/Catholics United is in its criticisms. Catholics for (a Free) Choice is at least consistent in that it will bash anyone who expresses the slightest concern for the plight of the unborn, however sick and disturbing such an approach may be. Catholics United, on the other hand, claims to champion the cause of peace and justice, but only ever seems to criticize the pro-life movement, those who criticize Barack Obama, and those who dare criticize any of Catholics in Alliance/Catholics United's core members. They also made it a point to "lament" the murder of Dr. George Tiller, but it seems they only did this as an excuse to take a pot shot at the pro-life movement. Yet when it comes to things like speaking out in support of the oppressed people in Iran, denouncing the slave trade in the Sudan, or addressing human rights abuses in China, all you hear are crickets chirping. I guess Obama needs to address those issues first, so Catholics in Alliance/Catholics United can receive their talking points from him - or rather, his teleprompter.
Regarding the murder of Dr. George Tiller, which also happened since my last blog post, I will share two statements I issued on my Facebook page concerning the incident. Besides expressing my utter disgust with how the Obama administration has chosen to use this tragedy as a means of marginalizing the pro-life movement, I will let these two statements reflect my thoughts on the matter until new developments arise:
"George Tiller's murder was certainly beyond the pale, but so is using that murder as an excuse to score cheap political points at the pro-life movement's expense."
"The murder of George Tiller was an atrocity. It was morally unjustifiable, and I will have words with anyone who says otherwise. But let no one dare insult my intelligence by pretending he is a martyr for humanitarian causes. There are approximately 60,000 reasons why I vehemently beg to differ."
Lastly, to those of you who have sent me e-mails regarding my blog, I'd like to say thank you. Even though I have not had the chance to reply to each of you individually, just know that your comments are appreciated, and I do plan to address some of the issues raised in your e-mails. And no, I am not on Twitter, and don't plan to be at this time, though that might change at a later date. Please keep the feedback coming. I pray this post finds each of you well. God bless!
In Jesus and Mary,
Gerald
Thursday, June 4, 2009
The Fruits Of The Watering Down Of The Catholic Faith At Catholic Universities In The Name Of "Tolerance" and "Dialogue"...
...speak for themselves.
Congratulations. Fr. Jenkins. It looks like you found the common moral ground you so desperately sought with Obama.
Congratulations. Fr. Jenkins. It looks like you found the common moral ground you so desperately sought with Obama.
Wednesday, June 3, 2009
State of Connecticut Resumes Efforts To Deny First Amendment Rights To Catholics
Great article by Drew Zahn posted on World Net Daily regarding the state of Connecticut's attempts to portray the Catholic Church's right to peacefully assemble as a violation of state lobbying laws. It appears that the state government will not soon abandon its war on the First Amendment rights of Catholics.
For some further background on this subject, please read my previous post on the subject.
In trying to destroy the moral fiber of a country by promoting a culture of death and attacking the institution of marriage, a necessary first step is to drown out the voices of those who would call attention to such attempts. Connecticut would make Saul Alinsky proud. God bless!
In Jesus and Mary,
Gerald
For some further background on this subject, please read my previous post on the subject.
In trying to destroy the moral fiber of a country by promoting a culture of death and attacking the institution of marriage, a necessary first step is to drown out the voices of those who would call attention to such attempts. Connecticut would make Saul Alinsky proud. God bless!
In Jesus and Mary,
Gerald
Friday, May 29, 2009
Lest I Forget Two Important Birthdays...
May 27 was the 135th birthday of the great British Apostle of Common Sense, G.K. Chesterton. Of course, the last 73 of those days have been celebrated by our dear friend Gilbert in what one can only hope are far, far better environs.
May 28 came and went, and I completely neglected to acknowledge that this blog is now one year old, and already a heck of a lot more mature than I am :-) It's amazing how quickly time passes. God bless!
In Jesus and Mary,
Gerald
May 28 came and went, and I completely neglected to acknowledge that this blog is now one year old, and already a heck of a lot more mature than I am :-) It's amazing how quickly time passes. God bless!
In Jesus and Mary,
Gerald
Regarding the Nature of Catholic Truth
Note: This is a slightly reworded version of a comment I left in a thread from another blog in response to a person who, upon being pressed for a rationale for supporting the actions of Fr. Jenkins in defying the USCCB and Canon Law mandates to honor a man who is hostile to Catholic moral theology, responded with the tiresome red herring of the Church sex abuse scandal, as though this somehow validated Fr. Jenkins' actions. This reworded version first appeared on my Facebook profile.
There is a growing tendency among certain people to assume that sinful behavior on the part of some somehow affects the availability of sanctifying grace for all. My comments address this fallacy as well.
We often speak of finding healing with sins committed by Catholics; but the sins committed by Catholics are precisely the result of failing to adhere to Catholic moral doctrine. It is something we have all been guilty of, as we share the same fallen nature. But healing comes through acknowledging our own errors and seeking forgiveness for them, and to forgive others for the errors committed against us. One need only read the Catechism to see the truth of this. Healing comes by acknowledging what the truth is, and seeking to live by it.
We often speak of unity in the Church, but there would be no divisions among Catholics in the first place if everyone followed the true teachings of the Church. No less a person than St. John wrote in his second Epistle (2 John 1:9-11): “Anyone who is so “progressive” as not to remain in the teaching of the Christ does not have God; whoever remains in the teaching has the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this doctrine, do not receive him in your house or even greet him; for whoever greets him shares in his evil works.” (NAB translation)
Those are harsh words, indeed; but let us remember that they are, first and foremost, a plea for unity, and a warning against those who, under the guise of being Catholic, seek to distort the Church’s teachings. We are called to pray for those who misrepresent the truth, but not to heed their counsel. Yet when a person speaks the truth, we are called to heed their counsel regardless of the personal sanctity of the speaker. The Church does not teach that a man must be holy to speak the words of truth. Even the priests who committed those atrocious acts of sexual abuse against predominantly teenage boys celebrated valid Masses and consecrated the Eucharist validly, because their ability to celebrate the sacraments depends not on their personal sanctity, but on the faculties bestowed upon them at the time of their ordination. This is not to say, of course, that the sinful behavior of a priest is without consequences. As the 19th century poet Clemens Brentano once wrote: “Just as the sacrifice on Calvary was accomplished by the cruelty of ungodly priests and by the bloodthirsty hands of brutal executioners, so is the sacrifice of the Mass, even when unworthily celebrated, a true sacrifice; but the guilty and unworthy priest who celebrates it plays the part not only of the Jewish priests who condemned Our Lord but also of the soldiers who crucified Him.” St. Paul says that he who eats the True Body and drinks the True Blood unworthily eats and drinks judgment upon himself. Note that he did not say that the unworthy man ate and drank judgment upon others.
Now I say the above things not to encourage people to seek the unholiest of men for spiritual direction, but rather to show that the foundation of the Church and her theology is not the teachings and actions of men, but rather the teaching and action of the God-man, who in His words and deeds – but more importantly, in His person! – was the fullness of Divine Revelation. Had the Church relied on the unwavering holiness of her members, she would have crumbled centuries ago. But the Church stands firm despite the failings of man, and the Sacraments are available to us despite the moral shortcomings of those who confer them. This is because the Church is safeguarded against the gates of hell by the promise Jesus made to St. Peter, and not by the words and actions of men. And as the mission of the Church is to spread the Good News – to spread the truth – it is fitting that God has also given us the assurance of freedom from error when the Church pronounces on matters of faith and morals. This is not to give the temporal leaders of the Church greater power, but rather to assist them in their ability to serve His Church faithfully. That there are those who fail to carry out their obligation to spread the truth faithfully is a sad reality. That this failure often manifests itself in moral failure is also a reality. And the fact that those who remain in the truth are also guilty of moral failure is, likewise, a sad reality. We are a body of sinners, after all. But what separates the faithful priests and faithful Catholics from the unfaithful priests and unfaithful Catholics is the willingness to acknowledge personal errors and to seek forgiveness for those errors. It is the unrepentant man who breaks faith, and it is the unrepentant man seeking to validate his errors rather than confess them who is the true agent of division within the Church.
It is important in talking about things like the sex abuse and Notre Dame commencement scandals to explain what exactly scandal is. The modern world would have us believe that scandal occurs when unworthy behavior is made public knowledge. In actuality, scandal occurs when one person leads another into sin. The sex abuse that was committed by some priests – who were predominantly homosexual pederasts rather than pedophiles – is not scandal unless the sexual behavior was willingly reciprocated by the victim. It is, more properly, a violation, because if the victim is an unwilling participant, then the victim is not sinning, since the deliberate intent required for sin to take place is not there. Only the perpetrator sins, and there is no scandal. Where scandal takes place is when a person in a position of authority knows of the abuse and does nothing about it, thus enabling the perpetrator to commit sin. There the higher authority can be said to be giving scandal. And yes, those individuals who allowed it to continue deserve their punishment. They also deserve the same forgiveness accorded to any other sinner, and deserve absolution if there is genuine remorse for the sinful behavior.
The Notre Dame affair is a somewhat different creature. Fr. Jenkins gave scandal to the Catholic faithful by using his authority as President of a Catholic university to publicly honor – in the name of Catholic higher education – a man who betrays the most fundamental beliefs about the dignity and inviolability of human life, thus creating the impression that it was alright to do this. I’ve heard all the arguments about how certain aspects of Obama’s teaching are in line with Catholic teaching. Any heretic can say the same, since all heresy is based on some truth, and is distinguishable from Catholic teaching only by the lies that it propagates. To say that Obama deserved to be honored despite the disagreements is tantamount to saying that the great heretics of ages past – such as Arius and Pelagius – likewise deserved to be honored by Catholic institutions for their commitment to those aspects of Catholic teaching they happened to agree with, despite their very fierce disagreement with the Church on some very crucial and non-negotiable matters.
I’ve also heard the straw man “promoting dialogue” and “other politicians support war and the death penalty which makes them just as bad” arguments used in support of giving Obama an honorary degree. However, Obama is on record as supporting both war and the death penalty, and the speech was delivered to a captive audience with no possibility given for a follow up dialogue, so even if those arguments had any merit in relation to Obama’s honorary degree – and they do not – neither of them is truly applicable in the present discussion.
The point is, Fr. Jenkins knowingly acted not only against the mandates of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (which in and of itself is not necessarily punishable, since the USCCB lacks the authority to either pronounce on such matters or to enforce such pronunciations), but also against canon law mandates (a fact confirmed by the head of the Vatican’s Apostolic Signatura and chief canon lawyer of the Church, Archbishop Raymond Burke; and violation of a canon law mandate is very much punishable). He could have repented and rescinded the offer of an honorary degree and still allowed Obama to speak. That would have ended the scandal (though not the controversy) before it had fairly begun, since no honor would have been bestowed. Instead, he remained obstinate in his error, and continued to use fallacious arguments to support his decision (and dishonestly continued to use those arguments even after his local Bishop, the head of the Apostolic Signatura, and nearly a third of the Bishops of the United States all pointed out the errors inherent in those arguments). Fr. Jenkins is the classic definition of a man who knowingly led others into scandal by creating the impression among Catholics that it was okay – even laudatory! – to honor such a man, and then he proceeded to compound the problem by attempting to validate his error in the eyes of the Church, which makes him the true source of division in this whole sorry affair. We are called to forgive Fr. Jenkins for the scandal that he gave; but we are also obligated to call him to repent, and to pray that he might experience that repentance and to seek absolution for his error.
I have noticed, by the way, that when people are called to explain their support for individuals who oppose the Church’s teachings on the dignity and inviolability of human life, they have a tendency to yell, “sex abuse scandal!” as though this somehow validates their viewpoint. It doesn’t even come close to doing that. The sex abuse issue is indeed a tragic one, but is completely separate from the present discussion. It is not a valid answer to how a person believes that they can in good conscience support an opponent of the Church’s most fundamental moral teachings. That question still awaits an answer…
There is a growing tendency among certain people to assume that sinful behavior on the part of some somehow affects the availability of sanctifying grace for all. My comments address this fallacy as well.
We often speak of finding healing with sins committed by Catholics; but the sins committed by Catholics are precisely the result of failing to adhere to Catholic moral doctrine. It is something we have all been guilty of, as we share the same fallen nature. But healing comes through acknowledging our own errors and seeking forgiveness for them, and to forgive others for the errors committed against us. One need only read the Catechism to see the truth of this. Healing comes by acknowledging what the truth is, and seeking to live by it.
We often speak of unity in the Church, but there would be no divisions among Catholics in the first place if everyone followed the true teachings of the Church. No less a person than St. John wrote in his second Epistle (2 John 1:9-11): “Anyone who is so “progressive” as not to remain in the teaching of the Christ does not have God; whoever remains in the teaching has the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this doctrine, do not receive him in your house or even greet him; for whoever greets him shares in his evil works.” (NAB translation)
Those are harsh words, indeed; but let us remember that they are, first and foremost, a plea for unity, and a warning against those who, under the guise of being Catholic, seek to distort the Church’s teachings. We are called to pray for those who misrepresent the truth, but not to heed their counsel. Yet when a person speaks the truth, we are called to heed their counsel regardless of the personal sanctity of the speaker. The Church does not teach that a man must be holy to speak the words of truth. Even the priests who committed those atrocious acts of sexual abuse against predominantly teenage boys celebrated valid Masses and consecrated the Eucharist validly, because their ability to celebrate the sacraments depends not on their personal sanctity, but on the faculties bestowed upon them at the time of their ordination. This is not to say, of course, that the sinful behavior of a priest is without consequences. As the 19th century poet Clemens Brentano once wrote: “Just as the sacrifice on Calvary was accomplished by the cruelty of ungodly priests and by the bloodthirsty hands of brutal executioners, so is the sacrifice of the Mass, even when unworthily celebrated, a true sacrifice; but the guilty and unworthy priest who celebrates it plays the part not only of the Jewish priests who condemned Our Lord but also of the soldiers who crucified Him.” St. Paul says that he who eats the True Body and drinks the True Blood unworthily eats and drinks judgment upon himself. Note that he did not say that the unworthy man ate and drank judgment upon others.
Now I say the above things not to encourage people to seek the unholiest of men for spiritual direction, but rather to show that the foundation of the Church and her theology is not the teachings and actions of men, but rather the teaching and action of the God-man, who in His words and deeds – but more importantly, in His person! – was the fullness of Divine Revelation. Had the Church relied on the unwavering holiness of her members, she would have crumbled centuries ago. But the Church stands firm despite the failings of man, and the Sacraments are available to us despite the moral shortcomings of those who confer them. This is because the Church is safeguarded against the gates of hell by the promise Jesus made to St. Peter, and not by the words and actions of men. And as the mission of the Church is to spread the Good News – to spread the truth – it is fitting that God has also given us the assurance of freedom from error when the Church pronounces on matters of faith and morals. This is not to give the temporal leaders of the Church greater power, but rather to assist them in their ability to serve His Church faithfully. That there are those who fail to carry out their obligation to spread the truth faithfully is a sad reality. That this failure often manifests itself in moral failure is also a reality. And the fact that those who remain in the truth are also guilty of moral failure is, likewise, a sad reality. We are a body of sinners, after all. But what separates the faithful priests and faithful Catholics from the unfaithful priests and unfaithful Catholics is the willingness to acknowledge personal errors and to seek forgiveness for those errors. It is the unrepentant man who breaks faith, and it is the unrepentant man seeking to validate his errors rather than confess them who is the true agent of division within the Church.
It is important in talking about things like the sex abuse and Notre Dame commencement scandals to explain what exactly scandal is. The modern world would have us believe that scandal occurs when unworthy behavior is made public knowledge. In actuality, scandal occurs when one person leads another into sin. The sex abuse that was committed by some priests – who were predominantly homosexual pederasts rather than pedophiles – is not scandal unless the sexual behavior was willingly reciprocated by the victim. It is, more properly, a violation, because if the victim is an unwilling participant, then the victim is not sinning, since the deliberate intent required for sin to take place is not there. Only the perpetrator sins, and there is no scandal. Where scandal takes place is when a person in a position of authority knows of the abuse and does nothing about it, thus enabling the perpetrator to commit sin. There the higher authority can be said to be giving scandal. And yes, those individuals who allowed it to continue deserve their punishment. They also deserve the same forgiveness accorded to any other sinner, and deserve absolution if there is genuine remorse for the sinful behavior.
The Notre Dame affair is a somewhat different creature. Fr. Jenkins gave scandal to the Catholic faithful by using his authority as President of a Catholic university to publicly honor – in the name of Catholic higher education – a man who betrays the most fundamental beliefs about the dignity and inviolability of human life, thus creating the impression that it was alright to do this. I’ve heard all the arguments about how certain aspects of Obama’s teaching are in line with Catholic teaching. Any heretic can say the same, since all heresy is based on some truth, and is distinguishable from Catholic teaching only by the lies that it propagates. To say that Obama deserved to be honored despite the disagreements is tantamount to saying that the great heretics of ages past – such as Arius and Pelagius – likewise deserved to be honored by Catholic institutions for their commitment to those aspects of Catholic teaching they happened to agree with, despite their very fierce disagreement with the Church on some very crucial and non-negotiable matters.
I’ve also heard the straw man “promoting dialogue” and “other politicians support war and the death penalty which makes them just as bad” arguments used in support of giving Obama an honorary degree. However, Obama is on record as supporting both war and the death penalty, and the speech was delivered to a captive audience with no possibility given for a follow up dialogue, so even if those arguments had any merit in relation to Obama’s honorary degree – and they do not – neither of them is truly applicable in the present discussion.
The point is, Fr. Jenkins knowingly acted not only against the mandates of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (which in and of itself is not necessarily punishable, since the USCCB lacks the authority to either pronounce on such matters or to enforce such pronunciations), but also against canon law mandates (a fact confirmed by the head of the Vatican’s Apostolic Signatura and chief canon lawyer of the Church, Archbishop Raymond Burke; and violation of a canon law mandate is very much punishable). He could have repented and rescinded the offer of an honorary degree and still allowed Obama to speak. That would have ended the scandal (though not the controversy) before it had fairly begun, since no honor would have been bestowed. Instead, he remained obstinate in his error, and continued to use fallacious arguments to support his decision (and dishonestly continued to use those arguments even after his local Bishop, the head of the Apostolic Signatura, and nearly a third of the Bishops of the United States all pointed out the errors inherent in those arguments). Fr. Jenkins is the classic definition of a man who knowingly led others into scandal by creating the impression among Catholics that it was okay – even laudatory! – to honor such a man, and then he proceeded to compound the problem by attempting to validate his error in the eyes of the Church, which makes him the true source of division in this whole sorry affair. We are called to forgive Fr. Jenkins for the scandal that he gave; but we are also obligated to call him to repent, and to pray that he might experience that repentance and to seek absolution for his error.
I have noticed, by the way, that when people are called to explain their support for individuals who oppose the Church’s teachings on the dignity and inviolability of human life, they have a tendency to yell, “sex abuse scandal!” as though this somehow validates their viewpoint. It doesn’t even come close to doing that. The sex abuse issue is indeed a tragic one, but is completely separate from the present discussion. It is not a valid answer to how a person believes that they can in good conscience support an opponent of the Church’s most fundamental moral teachings. That question still awaits an answer…
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
