The Shrinking Cleric

Golden Magic

2011-10-26T17:40:00.000-04:00

Golden Magic

April 26, 1999 – October 24, 2011

Golden Magic, first greyhound of Mimi and Bob Jones, died peacefully on Monday, October 24, 2011, after a brief illness. Magic was 12 1/2 years old.

If there is one word that could describe Magic’s life, that word would be “charmed.” Magic was born, trained, raced and retired with her littermates, a somewhat rare occurrence in the greyhound world. Her brief racing career could be summarized by the words most frequently used to describe her track performance: “Never a factor.” However, her kennel master saw something in her and her siblings and made sure that they were put in SEGA’s care. Bob always said, “Magic only won one race in her life, and that was the one to our house.”

Magic was an incurable counter-surfer, resistant to every known method of breaking the habit. One could sit at the kitchen counter and count on seeing a black nose sticking above the counter like a shark fin, seeking food that had been left just a little too close to the edge. Several memories spring to mind in this regard. Mimi lost a chicken salad sandwich to Magic when she turned her back on it in order to get a soda. Magic stole a New York strip from Bob when he stepped into the other room to answer his cell phone. She was a little stunned when he chased her down, wrestled the steak out of her mouth, and ate it while glaring at her. (She did get a couple of left over pieces, though.)

Perhaps her greatest theft was accomplished with Bravo (1997-2009), her adopted brother. One night, when we went to the pool for a swim, we took a rotisserie chicken from the refrigerator and placed it safely out of canine reach (so we thought) on the back of the stove. When we returned for dinner twenty minutes later, there was no chicken to be found. Mimi initiated a search and found aluminum foil in the living room. It was neatly unfolded with surgical precision and there was no sign of any chicken, bone, cartilage, or even a grease stain. Magic and Bravo looked somewhat sheepishly at us, but never did anything to acknowledge their crime.

Magic was lucky, too, very lucky. On one occasion, she stole a bacon-wrapped filet mignon, and devoured it before being discovered. She ate the steak, the bacon, and the 1 ½ inch long hard plastic screw that fixed the bacon around the steak. Bob got on the phone to the vet, “What do we do?” “There’s really not much to do,” the vet replied. “You’ll just have to pray that this screw doesn’t perforate her intestine.” For two days we watched Magic very carefully. Finally, on the third morning, along with her other business, out came the screw in pristine condition and Magic was none the worse for wear. If she had been a cat, she would have used up about four lives on that one.

It would be hard to find a dog as loyal as Magic. Every day for 10 years, she would race to the door whenever Bob came home from work, pushing the other dogs out of the way to claim her place as “Daddy’s favorite.” In fact, if Mimi needed to get Magic in the house, a task that could be anything but easy, all she had to do was holler, “Magic, Daddy’s home.” Magic would tear across the yard to get to the door.

Magic was with us for almost 10 years. We will always remember these years with joy because of what this playful, joyful, loving greyhound brought to our home. Maybe, we were the ones that were “charmed” after all.

The picture above was taken in the spring of 2011 by Cindy Frezon. It has always been our favorite picture of Magic because we believe that Cindy captured the essence of our wonderful dog in this image. It is used here with her gracious permission.

Chalk Up Another One for the Religion of Peace

2011-01-30T16:41:00.000-05:00

As Cairo continues to erupt in violence that, as reported by Stratfor, has been provoked by Hamas and the Moslem Brotherhood, I thought this article from the American Spectator might be enlightening.

Religious Persecution by Muslims? Perish the Thought!

A Cheery Read for the New Year from the Barna Group

2011-01-06T10:24:00.009-05:00

The Barna Group is a major polling and trends research firm that assesses the current state of evangelical Christianity. Their conclusions, though, are often applicable to all branches of the Christian faith. Hence, I'm attaching a link to their 2010 summary article of "Six Megathemes Emerge from 2010" for your reading. Here's the link:

Six Megathemes Emerge from 2010

A Great Article from Virtueonline

2010-08-04T09:05:00.000-04:00

Dr, Bruce Atkinson has written a fine article on the Stages of Moral Regression. Many people wonder how we have come to our current societal situation. Dr. Atkinson provides a good answer to this that is biblically well-founded.

Here's the link:

VirtueOnline - As Eye See It - STAGES OF MORAL REGRESSION - Bruce Atkinson

Anne, We Hardly Knew Ye!

2010-07-31T09:40:00.001-04:00

Anne Rice has quit Christianity. The lady who brought us such classics as Interview with the Vampire and The Vampire Lestat converted to Christianity in 2000. She followed her conversion with a couple of passably good books on Jesus.

However, the bloom is now off the rose and Ms. Rice states that she is "quitting Christianity but not Christ." Whatever that means.

Ms. Rice's particular objection with Christianity is that it is so contentious and, apparently, anti-everything-that's-modern. Ms. Rice states, "In the name of Christ, I refuse to be anti-gay. I refuse to be anti-feminist. I refuse to be anti-artificial birth control. I refuse to be anti-Democrat. I refuse to be anti-secular humanism. I refuse to be anti-science. I refuse to be anti-life. In the name of Christ, I quit Christianity and being Christian."

Ms. Rice's position is most unfortunate and it denies several realities. The first is this: A simple perusal of Christian history will show that Christianity has always been contentious, with factions emerging and fading throughout its 2,000 years of history. In fact, it is through the struggles that Christianity has been able to more clearly define matters of faith and doctrine. Further, it is through the fire of contention that many people have tempered their faith, removing the dross and leaving the steel of a genuine faith.

Secondly, her description of Christianity as anti-fill-in-the-blank is specious. Christians are not (or shouldn't be) anti-anything. Rather than being anti-gay, Christians are or should be for a biblical standard of sexual morality because that is how God intended us to express the sexual faculty. Christians should not be anti-feminist but for a biblical view of the woman that recognizes her value in the divine economy, a value that was so important that it was a woman who was called out of all creation to bear Christ the Savior. As to being anti-artificial birth control, Christians recognize that the era of the pill has seen one of the most disastrous fruits of the modern era: The separation of sexual activity from holy Matrimony and the procreation of children. In fact, the contraceptive mentality has reached such a point in our society that children are seen as a burden by many, and - at times - as a "punishment" even by the President of the United States. As to secular humanism, I would hope that a Christian opposes that hideous philosophy that places man at the center of the universe and not God. I would hope that Christians will lead the way in pointing that secular humanism has its roots in atheism and that it can only lead a person into a black hole of despair. I could go on indefinitely with this, but you get the point.

What I think is going on here is this: Ms. Rice has finally reached that point where faith conflicts with the world. Perhaps she had hoped that in becoming a Christian, she could somehow retain all of her previous beliefs. After all, a change of belief might place her at odds with her circle of friends. A change of belief might mean that she has to change her whole life, submitting her life to Christ and acknowledging his total lordship over all creation. Instead, I fear that pride has reared its ugly head and left this quite talented woman saying, as many have before her, "I want Jesus, but only on my terms. I want a comfortable Christ who will not challenge my beliefs."

Maybe Ms. Rice has fallen into the tendency that all men and women struggle with, the tendency to want to create God in our image, instead of allowing Him to recreate us in His. Maybe Ms. Rice, like a particular woman before her who standing before a tree, listened to a voice that said, "[If you eat of the fruit of this tree]...Ye shall not surely die: for God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil."

Let us pray that Ms. Rice will someday return to that other tree, that tree of a cross on the hillside of Jerusalem. Let us pray that she will return to that tree to stand witness to the faith of a God that was willing to die for her. Maybe Ms. Rice will come to see that following Christ demands that we be willing to change every attitude, every belief. Perhaps she will learn that the pleasures of this life are but illusion, that truth lies in the cross and empty tomb, that truth is found in the Church, the Body of Christ on earth. Let us pray for her soul.

Here's the link to the article.

In Good Faith: Anne Rice quits Christianity -- but not Christ - Religion: News and debate about Christianity, Islam and values - baltimoresun.com

We're All Crazy Now!

2010-07-30T09:13:00.000-04:00

In early 2009, after the inauguration of President Obama, Newsweek magazine ran a cover showing two hands shaking, one red and one blue. The caption read, "We're All Socialists Now!" Not wanting to be left out of this inclusive is the American Psychiatric Association which is in the process of introducing a new diagnostic manual which, presumably, could leave the overwhelming majority of the population open to mental health diagnosis. Let's prepare to welcome the new DSM!

Anyone involved in the mental health field knows what the DSM is. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders is a publication of the American Psychiatric Association that was initially intended to be a set of guidelines for researchers who needed pure definitional criteria of mental disorders. For example, if one wants to study the effectiveness of a treatment for depression, then one needs to know as clearly as possible what the symptoms for depression are. Further, one needs to be able to distinguish those who do not have the condition, so that they are not inappropriately introduced into the study.

This attempt to operationally define mental disorder really took off in the early 1980s with the introduction of the Third Edition of the DSM. About the same time, health insurers started using DSM codes as a way to track expenditures. Later it became customary for insurers to use these same codes to eliminate whole categories of diagnoses from the lists of those for which they were willing to pay. (One insurance executive told me, "If we don't pay for them, they lose their jobs. If they lose their jobs, they lose their insurance. If they lose their insurance, they're not our problem." In a fateful twist of irony that proves that God really does have a sense of humor, that same executive lost his job within months of that statement.)

Now the mental health community awaits the release of the Fifth Edition of the DSM. The story linked below from Reuters suggests there are concerns that, with this new edition, almost everyone will have a diagnosable mental disorder. As I see it, this is the result of a couple of factors. Psychiatry is in grave danger as a profession, with fewer medical students each year showing any interest in the field and pressure mounting by psychologists to obtain prescription privileges (something I vigorously oppose, by the way). As a result, I suspect that this broadening of diagnoses to included many who would be otherwise considered "normal" may be driven by the desire to expand those items for which mental health professionals may gain reimbursement.

However, lurking amidst all of this is something that I think is very dangerous. I worry that we may be on the precipice of entering a "soviet-style" of psychiatry where the holding of politically-incorrect positions can be classified as mental disorders. If we are going to start including "Temper Dysregulation Syndrome" into our diagnostic nomenclature, what is to stop us from expanding our possible patient base to include people who suffer from a syndrome that is defined by "excessive rigidity of thought in that the individual holds inflexible exclusive beliefs in a deity"? Do you think that can't happen? Think again. I know several very intelligent people who would support such a position.

The point to all of this is pretty simple. When the mental health Brahmans decide that they want to include diagnoses that resist operational definition, then they open up our fields not only to ridicule from a public that understands that most of this is of little use, but also to exploitation from those who would use the mental health field for self-serving ends.

Here's the link.

Mental health experts ask: Will anyone be normal? | Reuters

Who's Watching Big Brother?

2010-07-26T21:09:00.000-04:00

This is a great article from AmericanThinker.com, although the title is somewhat misleading. It actually has far more to do with the trivialization of religion that has taken place in our modern culture and society's unwillingness to accept that there might be any eternal consequences for our behavior. It's worth a read.

American Thinker- Print Article

$86,400 a day

2010-07-24T11:25:00.000-04:00

A former parishioner of mine sent me this very thoughtful meditation.

---

SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT!!!

Imagine that you had won the following prize in a contest:

Each morning your bank would deposit $ 86,400.00 in your private account for your use every day.

However, this prize had rules, just as any game has certain rules.

The first set of rules would be:

1. Everything that you didn't spend during each day would be taken away from you.
2. You may not simply transfer money into some other account.
3. You may only spend it.

Each morning upon awakening, the bank opens your account with another $86,400.00 for that day.

The second set of rules:

1. The bank can end the game without warning; at any time it can say, "It's over, the game is over!"
2. It can close the account and you will not receive a new one. What would you personally do?

You would buy anything and everything you wanted, right?

Not only for yourself, but for all people you love, right?

Even for people you don't know, because you couldn't possibly spend it all on yourself, right?

You would try to spend every cent, and use it all, right?

ACTUALLY, THIS GAME IS REALITY!!

Each of us is in possession of such a "magical" bank.

We just can't seem to see it.

THE BANK IS TIME!

Each awakening morning we receive 86,400 seconds as a gift of life, and when we go to sleep at night, any remaining time is NOT credited to us.

What we haven't lived up that day is forever lost.

Yesterday is forever gone.

Each morning the account is refilled, but the bank can dissolve your account at any time.......WITHOUT WARNING.

WELL, what will you do with your 86,400 seconds?

Aren't they worth so much more than the same amount in dollars?

Think about that, and always think of this:

Enjoy every second of your life, because time races by so much quicker than you think.

So take care of yourself, and enjoy life!

Have a wonderfully beautiful day!!!

Priest Under Fire for Serving Communion to Dog - News

2010-07-23T08:46:00.000-04:00

There are some things that are so ridiculous that one barely knows where to start. Here we have a story of an Anglican priestess giving "Communion" to a dog. Fortunately, since the priestess is ontologically incapable of consecrating Communion, it is more comedic than anything else. But it does highlight for any thinking person the problem that has occurred in the Anglican world by abandoning any semblance of loyalty either to the authority of Scripture or the authority of Apostolic tradition. Read it and weep if you are in the Anglican Communion. Read it and thank God Almighty if you are in the ACC or its churches that share full communion with her.

Priest Under Fire for Serving Communion to Dog - News

I don't know who he is...

2010-07-19T22:37:00.000-04:00

After Quasimodo's death, the bishop of the Cathedral of Notre Dame sent word through the streets of Paris that a new bell ringer was needed. The bishop decided that he would conduct the interviews personally and went up into the belfry to begin the screening process. After observing several applicants demonstrate their skills, he had decided to call it a day. Just then, an armless man approached him and announced that he was there to apply for the bell ringer's job. The bishop was incredulous. "You have no arms!" "No matter," said the man. "Observe!" And he began striking the bells with his face, producing a beautiful melody on the carillon. The bishop listened in astonishment, convinced he had finally found a replacement for Quasimodo. But suddenly, rushing forward to strike a bell, the armless man tripped and plunged headlong out of the belfry window to his death in the street below. The stunned bishop rushed to his side. When he reached the street, a crowd had gathered around the fallen figure, drawn by the beautiful music they had heard only moments before. As they silently parted to let the bishop through, one of them asked, "Bishop, who was this man?"

"I don't know his name," the bishop sadly replied, "but his face rings a bell."

The following day, despite the sadness that weighed heavily on his heart due to the unfortunate death of the armless campanologist, the bishop continued his interviews for the bell ringer of Notre Dame. The first man to approach him said, "Your Excellency, I am the brother of the poor armless wretch that fell to his death from this very belfry yesterday. I pray that you honor his life by allowing me to replace him in this duty." The bishop agreed to give the man an audition, and as the armless man's brother stooped to pick up a mallet to strike the first bell, he groaned, clutched his chest, twirled around, and died on the spot. Two monks, hearing the bishop's cries of grief at this second tragedy, rushed up the stairs to his side. 'What has happened? Who is this man?" the first monk asked breathlessly.

"I don't know his name," sighed the distraught bishop, "but he's a dead ringer for his brother!"

Some Comments on "The Death of a Catholic Seminary"

2010-07-19T13:30:00.002-04:00

Recently, my friend and brother priest Father John published a post on his website entitled "'Gay' Roman Catholic Seminaries". While I rarely trust Newsweek on anything (including sunrise and sunset), I read with interest a passage entitled, "The Death of a Catholic Seminary." It so resonated with my own experience in seminary in the 1980s that I felt compelled to publish it here along with my response to Father John.

--

The Death Of A Catholic Seminary

--

Due to the nature of the information contained in this article, it is necessary to protect the identity of the young author. The seminarian who wrote this story is known to the editor. The following is a truthful account of what has been going on in one of the major seminaries in the United States.

--

After spending four years in a Neo-Modernist Roman Catholic seminary, I have come to the firm belief that the source of the current crisis in the Church in the United States can be traced directly to the seminaries. The seminary is literally the seedbed of the faith.

Seminary education has traditionally been seen as one of the most important apostolates. Those charged with the formation in seminaries had upon their shoulders a very great responsibility: they were not simply forming a future priest, but the entire Church. Hence, the absolute necessity of quality spiritual and academic formation was clear.

One might argue that this sense has been lost in the torrent of the many erroneous interpretations of the "spirit" of the Second Vatican Council. It is not infrequent that one finds many aberrations in contemporary Catholicism, to the point where many of the faithful, even bishops, are unclear about what the Church really teaches.

Formation for the priesthood has changed drastically in most seminaries since Vatican II. In some seminaries, the changes were well implemented and orthodoxy was retained. In others, disaster followed, and has remained deeply rooted. Many embittered, frustrated priests and nuns continue to work in seminaries with an agenda for "reform" and "change" so that their corporate and personal ambitions and desires can be met. Many want to see priestesses, married clergy, allowance for dissent, and acceptance of homosexual and lesbian lifestyles, and believe the Spirit of the Council called for this kind of "openness" and change. Almost all of them are highly educated and experienced seminary educators.

The kind of formation one receives in seminary depends on the way the particular seminary leadership and faculty interpret the meaning of priesthood, and for that matter, ministry, worship, revelation, and even God himself. With the great political struggles going on deep within the fabric of the Church today, the essential meaning of our very religion is at stake. It is the same when one begins in seminary with the basic question of his vocation to the priesthood.

Because of this divisive crisis, there are now "correct" and "incorrect" ways to talk about priesthood.

Simply a "presider"

The "correct" version may involve a de-emphasis on the word "priest" because it is cultic and exclusive to some. It is more rightly referred to only as "ordained ministry," with an emphasis placed on the fact that some ministries are for regulating power. An "ordained minister" is commissioned in the name of the community to lead that community in worship. The "modernization" of the priest's role means that he is a social worker with religious politics, or a "community animator" with a dynamic personality and flair for drama and entertainment. He may also be simply "a leader of the community, " a "presider" who arranges worship and leads others as a conductor for an orchestra, and also runs the parish as another kind of business. He may also be the "counselor on call" who helps people feel better about themselves. In a time when pride causes us to so easily confuse personal ambition with vocation, it is becoming more and more common to find notions of priesthood that increasingly exclude rich sacramental definitions. Because of the inevitable and increasing envy and jealousy over the priest's unique ontological status and sacramental ministry, there is a mounting movement to demythologize the priesthood and remove its sacred and unique character, and have the priest be essentially no different than anyone else. If others cannot have what he has, then what he has must be removed. If it cannot be removed, it should be watered down.

In the seminary where I went, the more liberal and watered-down definitions of priesthood mentioned above would fall well within the acceptable parameters of a "correct" description of a priestly character. "Social Justice" was the key term to profess at all times. It was in an erroneous interpretation of this term that one could find considerable room within which to form his own notion of priesthood - as long as it maintained a prophetic witness against "unjust structures."

A man would inevitably find trouble, however, if he used language like "the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass." He would have two strikes against him if he in turn stood in opposition to the concept of "priestesses" in the Roman Catholic Church. Such a position would not be respected or looked upon as being even remotely reasonable in light of the experience of "modernity." To think and hold such ideas privately was considered allowable. To hold these things with conviction would not.

The course of formation I experienced, sadly enough, depended heavily upon the guiding principles of political, and especially theological, correctness. These principles controlled the spiritual and academic climate of the seminary institution and its faculty. They were opposed to an adherence (in a spirit of conviction and fidelity) to the authentic teachings of the Church, exhibited through the Holy Father, Magisterium, and Sacred Tradition. The Church's Tradition and traditions were studied from a certain subtle but consistently biased perspective, so that the meaning of many events and personal contributions would be perverted or cast in a negative, offensive light. The spirit of "reform" became most attractive and was perhaps best inculcated after the student could be substantially convinced of the overwhelming "unattractiveness" of the Church's past.

For example, St. Thomas Aquinas was rarely if at all used for our instruction in philosophy or theology. Instead, certain select writings were chosen or referred to for the purpose of exemplifying the limitations of antiquated medieval thought. Particularly underscored were Aquinas's "sexist and demeaning attitudes toward women," and his "erroneous" understanding of human biology. From there it was no difficult task to argue his disqualification from serious contemporary theological discourse. He was consulted as an authority, however, when he was shown to "deny" the Immaculate Conception.

Latin, Greek and Hebrew were deemed irrelevant or useless for the needs of parish ministry, hence these were not part of our seminary training. Patristics were infrequently mentioned and not encouraged, and the lives of the Saints and Doctors of the Church were implicitly written off as antiquated piety. The Rosary was looked upon as being suitable for those without the capacity to approach God intellectually, and it was beneath one of theological sophistication.

Through various erroneous interpretations of the "Spirit of Vatican II," a certain spirit of "sophistication" paved the way for many different "ecclesiologies," not all of which are from Christ. Many are laden with ideologies foreign or contrary to the Gospel. Moral theologies have collapsed into versions of proportionalism anchored vaguely in the "fundamental option" - to the point that mortal sin is nearly impossible to commit, and one may have allowance to live any way he chooses - as long as he is fundamentally "oriented" in the direction of God. An authentic Catholic spirituality of moral discernment may easily collapse into values wedded to the world, naturally heading towards moral and spiritual relativism.

Theological "rigidity"

All of these elements found their way into the fabric of our seminary instruction, one way or another. Even if one did not directly espouse pure relativism, there was still a pervasive, insistent demand for "dialogue" with various perspectives with relativism as a subtle philosophical basis. Faith could venture too close to a seemingly innocent, though mortal, compromise. It didn't seem far from the curb to the gutter. But to hold to "official" teaching, i.e., magisterial documents, was perceived as theological rigidity, disagreeing with certain dubious or erroneous philosophical positions was considered intolerance.

Built upon this drive was the relentless emphasis on the "oppressive and sinful structures" in the world, but perhaps mostly in the Church. This eventually led to the "patriarchy" of Sacred Tradition and contemporary Catholic culture. This form of "oppression" was considered to be the source of many great evils, especially in the Church (not to mention throughout Salvation History). The fury of the radically feminist ego, its lust for power, and ambition for rule was considered justified because of the pain caused by this ancient form of male oppression - as if this form of "activism" was what Christ came to institute. If one were to question how this was supposed to be a vision of good formation for the Catholic Priesthood, that man might find himself cornered with accusations that he was "self-righteous."

In some seminaries, this would not be a problem. The man would be evaluated against certain criteria, some of the most important qualities being personal character, moral fibre, prayer life, and fidelity to Papal and Magisterial teaching. Faculty should be more interested in supporting the teachings of the Holy Father, not dissenting theologians.

In other seminaries however, like the one I attended, this was not so. An attempt to identify the components of the Catholic priest and his spirituality in light of Papal and Magisterial documents, or the Church's traditional Doctors, i.e., St. Alphonsus Liguori, no matter how well articulated, would be deemed "inadequate."

The difference in perspectives was well symbolized by our way of worship. To begin with, we were instructed upon entry to the seminary that we could not kneel at the consecration during Mass, nor could we kneel after receiving communion. This would "break community." We were told that standing was also a posture of reverence on par with kneeling, and that it was more in keeping with Vatican II's "call to mission" of Social Justice - hence standing to be ready to "go out" to enact this justice. Kneeling was considered a "privatistic" worship disconnected from others. It also reflected a repressed piety, a spirituality of "Ghetto Catholicism." This was said to be incompatible with the theology of the Council, and the spirit of the liturgical reforms.

I learned early on that everything done at the seminary had reasoning behind it, although not always good reasoning. The reality behind the theory was that our worship and training were being watered down. We were in practice living a protestantized version of worship. What had always been distinctively Catholic in our Tradition was circumvented, de-emphasized, omitted or excluded. The way we pray is the way we believe.

Inclusive language was the most powerful of all corrosive agents. Not only were the most vocal "justice-conscious" seminarians rewarded for their attacks in class against "insensitive" theological language and oppressive liturgy in the Church's worship, they were considered "courageous men" and commended for their concerns for justice. All through our community Masses, one could not keep from hearing the deliberate and loud references to God in repetitious neutral or even feminine pronouns. The result was the total disruption of the Mass, transforming it from worship to a battle of words.

Collar was sign of "clericalism"

At Mass, the priest was often simply referred to as the "presider." He was the one leading us in prayer, "animating" the community. Many "presiders" improvised upon the Mass, adding their own touch to the eucharistic prayers. Making sure the readings were inclusivized was the responsibility of the reader for the day. The chalice was normally done away with (unless a visiting bishop or dignitary were present), replaced with a standard wine glass. Some priests often would either not attend the daily community Mass, or would cantor instead of concelebrate. Others would just sit in the congregation to show their solidarity with the feminist nuns, typically with their collar undone. The feminist nuns used to give their "communion reflections" (homilies) after the communion song; these were nearly always filled with a spirit of resentment and a call for "reform."

We, as Roman Catholic seminarians, were not allowed to wear clerical clothing. This was because the collar was a sign of "clericalism." Though the rector had been known to tell bishops he did not want to "confuse ministry with the wearing of the collar," the reality behind abolishing the collar in our seminary was that it was a cause of great anxiety for the feminists. In many ways it was, for them, a great symbol of oppression - it was a form of ministry that "excluded" women, and therefore an excessive wearing of the collar was unjust and insensitive.

We were told from the beginning that seminarians were not to refer to any of the faculty as "Father" or "Sister." We were not to be caught up with "titles," as this was another form of clericalism. These things would also offend against the "ecumenical" mission that the seminary was committed to. In terms of a "confusion of ministries," one might question the very practice inculcated in the seminary.

Another divisive factor in the seminary was the reputation of a large homosexual culture. Having gone there for four years, I had seen much that was demoralizing. This was a volatile issue in the seminary, as there were sizeable numbers of men on both sides of the issue. During a class conference, the question that was raised was the unchecked effeminate, scandalous behavior of some seminarians, the negative reputation of the seminary gained by this recurring image, and the kinds of role models the seminary was tacitly approving in recommending these men for orders. The Vice Rector replied by saying the seminary admitted men of both orientations, but the policy was that all had to be celibate. The general split of the house policy was toleration. On the other hand, I did learn through experience that what was not condoned was "intolerance" and "homophobia."

As soon as it was learned that I was one who disliked and criticized such behavior, I was labeled "homophobic." I was even criticized by some seminarians and faculty as being "too masculine." I was concerned what my friends and family would think of the priesthood if I invited them to see where I lived and studied. Because I found these things embarrassing or shameful, many who were charged with evaluating me felt I was the one who had the problem.

Desensitizing occurs

The sad thing is that a man can go into the seminary and be shocked by what he sees, and yet by the time he graduates he may be so desensitized that he may no longer see these things as a problem. It becomes just another facet of "the reality of the Church today." But was everything included in this "reality" of the Church necessarily good and fostered by the Holy Spirit?

Most of the seminary faculty felt my observations and concerns about the seminary to be "judgmental." Therefore, I was dubbed "pastorally insensitive."

To accentuate and build upon these spiritual and moral collapses, the textbooks we used for coursework nurtured and enhanced the growth in our minds of doubt. This brought the seeds of "false doctrines" to complete maturity. It was a hand-in-hand dynamic: the formation would confirm the agenda in the texts, and the agenda in the texts would affirm, enhance, and further strength the sour spirit of formation.

For our entire first academic year, we had to study Richard P. McBrien's Catholicism. This book set the most fertile foundations for doubt and intellectual departure from the true Catholic Faith. It was through subtle and clever deception by veiled, ambiguous language, that McBrien's book was so effective. It became the basis for the reasonableness and goodness of dissent. Some of his more exemplary ideas, implied and cleverly suggested throughout the book, are that we don't have to believe in the virginity of Blessed Mother; that we don't have to believe or assent to follow Church teaching unless it explicitly states it has dogmatic status; and that we must admit to Jesus having been ignorant and in error. McBrien expertly employed his language so that he remained within a "legal" framework, and made outrageous suggestions which to some appear compelling. I recall seeing the firsthand results of this book's use in a discussion I had with another seminarian - he was firmly convinced that "It's totally naive to think that Mary didn't have sex." He was not an isolated case - he was among a common class of seminarian that absorbed the philosophy of McBrien's book. So this seminarian's "openness" and capacity for "dialogue" was lauded; he was considered a "model" seminarian. As far as the spirit of this seminary went, it was permissible to believe as this man did. It was also acceptable to believe that Mary was a virgin; but what was not acceptable was a conviction that our Blessed Mother was always a virgin. To adhere to any orthodox position with fidelity and conviction would be perceived as intolerant of "dialogue," and would reveal some kind of unhealthy "rigidity."

A parallel magisterium

I had an important discussion with the Vice Rector regarding my evaluation, where he criticized my sense of fidelity to the Holy Father's teachings, and my position on the impossibility of priestesses. He said that my position was "inadequate" because the Pope could change the teaching at any time - and since I was so convinced of the impossibility of the ordination of priestesses, he saw that as evidence for my rigidity and how I did not know anything about the levels of authority in the Church. "When the Pope changes tomorrow," he said "and decides to ordain women - then where will your 'fidelity' be? Will you change also, or will you be a source of division in the parish? This is our concern with you."

Although the seminary faculty believed they did "technically" teach what the Church teaches, the reality was that they taught a version - and most seminarians innocent or ignorant of authentic Church teaching would have no reason to believe otherwise. Church teaching would be mentioned, but it was always "nuanced" or muted, or given a relative status with other, liberal theologians. A parallel magisterium of popular liberal theologians was often presented and considered with equal authority. We often studied Protestant theologies right alongside Rahner, Schillebeeckx, Kung, Boff (even on occasion Matthew Fox) and so forth. Since there was no reliance upon the Magisterium for guidance or point of reference in most theological discussions, we seminarians would be adrift in a sea of opinion and interpretations, both Protestant and Catholic. To bring Magisterial positions into a "serious theological discussion" was somehow an offense to "academic freedom" and was thus perceived as an insult.

The study of moral theology was characterized by Charles Curran and the fundamental option, proportionalism and the subtle ridicule of traditional moral theologies. Papal encyclicals and theologians like Thomas Aquinas and Alphonsus Liguori were bumped because they were "old," and because of a few examples of apparent contradiction in their writings, chosen without appropriate and necessary contextualization. The impression was that the Pope was very fallible, traditional theologies were irrelevant or ridiculous in light of modern science and psychology, and the Magisterium was an agent of the Vatican for control over theological discussion. The components that were attacked were precisely those pillars preventing the various agendas of "the world" from entering and taking root in the mind and heart of the Church.

Confronted with a choice

In the area of spirituality, we had workshops on "women's spirituality," or something about "collaborative ministry" and "social justice," because this was perceived as "where the Spirit was" in today's world. Devotion to Mary as "Blessed Mother" was allowed, but generally not encouraged, as such a "servile" image and traditional feminine values were seen by many as not in keeping with feminist theology and the "contemporary experience of women." The Rosary, prayed in the main chapel by a group of seminarians, was tolerated for a time. But eventually the tension created in the seminary over this group brought it to an end. However, to please bishops, and as a kind of token gesture to the conservative element in the seminary, the Rosary was suddenly allowed again - with official seminary approval - but then only in a small hall chapel where there was no Blessed Sacrament, one day a week, between breakfast and classes. The reason behind not allowing the Rosary in the main chapel was that "the chapel is for liturgical celebrations - not devotions." And yet the chapel was used for a number of functions outside Catholic worship, including on occasion the rehearsals of a local symphony orchestra.

The greatest of spiritual tests came in my fourth year, in a course of so-called "Pastoral Counseling. " A laywoman with a very vocal agenda taught the course. Not only did she proudly inform us one day that she'd be taking off a class to attend the Call to Action seminars in Chicago (where everyone joined in the Eucharistic prayers as a woman in stole "presided"-and with a Catholic Bishop in the congregation), but she openly canvassed for gay and lesbian rights, radical feminism, and even abortion. Because I openly questioned this woman's arguments, I was penalized. To add to the irony, I was paid a visit by the Vice Rector, who wanted an explanation as to the reasons for my "making trouble" in her class.

My question to the faculty of the seminary involved whether it was formation we were receiving, or deformation. And, in turn, the question the faculty put to me was whether I was "open to where the Church is going today." But was doctrinal confusion, homosexuality, feminist anger and destruction of the priesthood where the Holy Spirit was truly leading us?

Through a discouraging dilemma, I knew that what was being taught directly contradicted what the Church taught, and I knew that the bishop in my home diocese supported me. He always expressed support of my orthodox values and beliefs, and told me on more than one occasion, "Remember I'm the one who ordains you, not they."

After four years in the seminary of standing up for what was right, I was finally punished with dismissal. I was asked to leave at the end of the academic year and to not return. Even though I was pointing out direct cases where the seminary stood contrary to Catholicism in its spiritual climate, members of the faculty protected themselves and the institution by making it appear I was the one who opposed the Church, her authority, and seminary formation.

I did not compromise what I believed and knew to be true. It was no longer a question of being prudently silent here and there when necessary. Rather, I was being directly confronted with a choice: either I had to admit to the problems being mine, which would in turn mean seeing a therapist, or hold fast to what I knew to be the truth. If I didn't answer "correctly," if I continued to maintain my position, I would certainly be voted down as a candidate for Holy Orders.

I was called into board meetings and forced to answer to charges of being "narrow," "rigid," "not open to dialogue," "having problems with women," "not trusting of the faculty," and "combative."

In order, these things were reactions to the truth - "narrow" was another way of saying I was too much the "papist" in my thinking, and that I couldn't appreciate other "ecclesiologies." "Rigid" meant that I would not compromise the teachings of the Church, or water them down to accommodate theological correctness. "Not open to dialogue" meant that I did not entertain dissent as an option in my faith. "Having problems with women" simply meant that I was critical of feminism and feminist theology, and the feminist agendas being forced on me. "Not trusting the faculty" referred to my wariness around the thick duplicity I encountered in my dealings with nearly all the faculty at the seminary. It was wise to maintain prudence in what one told a frustrated liberal faculty member who asks pointed and probing questions, because it somehow always became "incriminating evidence" during evaluations.

If I were to deny my faith -what I believed to be true about the Church, indeed what all orthodox Catholics and even the Pope himself believes and teaches - I would in effect be denying Christ, the Church's Author and Bridegroom.

Because of the ramifications of the rector's rage, and to my surprise, the bishop in turn also "released" me, as the matter had become quite political for him. The man who once told me in private not to compromise my beliefs compromised me, even after I had made him aware of everything I experienced at the seminary through letters. I was disappointed that he declined to intervene on my behalf, and that he could look the other way after all I had told him. He compromised because he did not want confrontations with a pandora's box.

I began to think long and hard about the substance of faith. I knew that the price to pay for faith in our Church's history was sometimes death. The early Christians arrested by the Romans faced such a situation: all they had to do was deny Christ and burn incense to the gods. They could then go free. They could have done this and continued to worship in the privacy of their hearts. But they knew that a faith existing in the heart must also be professed on the lips - it could not be compromised. The reality of what was at stake was all too clear for them, and therefore compromise was unthinkable. I wondered if, in seminaries like the one I attended, men are in a sense still being placed before the images of various gods and told to make a choice. After the first few compromises are made, the rest are easy.

Perhaps the burning of incense to the gods is more common now than in centuries past. The externals may have changed, so we are fooled into thinking such situations no longer occur. And so they happen all the more. Today, compromise is not only permitted, it is a way of life. We don't want to "offend" anyone, and we don't want confrontations.

Let the fruits speak for themselves as we look into the history of our Catholic conscience and find the incense of compromise now billowing in the halls of Christ's seminaries.

Published in the May 1995 issue of The Homiletic & Pastoral Review

--

Dear Father John,

I think the title "'Gay' Roman Catholic Seminaries" is inaccurate. I think a better, and less polemic, title would be, "The Problem and Influence of Homosexuality in Roman Catholic Seminaries."

Based on my experience in a Roman Catholic seminary in the early to mid-1980s, I would say that the description presented in the piece, "The Death of a Catholic Seminary" is apt. The experience of the former seminarian coincides almost exactly with my own. The only way that I was able to make it through was by a careful examination of the evaluation system employed by my seminary followed by an exploitation of that system to keep from having my own theological "rigidities" critiqued.

The sad part is that, after ordination, the same liberal cabal that controlled the seminary was also in power in my diocese and many others. Here's an example of how these modernists would operate: There was a priest in our diocese who was "notorious" for fidelity to the magisterial teaching of the Church. Another senior priest who was highly placed within the diocesan structure said to me, thinking that we were in agreement, "We really need to send Joe [pseudonym] away to get his thinking straight." The idea was to send "Joe" to a place called the House of Affirmation, a psychological treatment center, to help "Joe" with his rigidity. This smacked of Soviet psychiatric practice and I told the senior priest so, which didn't help my position any.

I agree that "Joe" was quite rigid. However, it seems to me that if you had to deal with all the opposition that "Joe" dealt with on a daily basis and your views were constantly under attack, you'd be pretty rigid too.

The authors description of the problem with his spineless bishop is, sadly, also common. The problem there is that most bishops in the Roman Catholic Church believe that the authority of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops trumps there own authority even in their own dioceses. Like most people, they want to get along with their peers and so, when push comes to shove, they knuckle under to political pressure and go with the flow, sometimes for calculated reasons. (Parenthetically, it should be noted that the Roman Catholic Church does not hold exclusive title to spineless and calculating members of the episcopate.) If one doubts that the USCCB is a powerful organization that controls the local ordinaries, pay close attention to the treatment that Bishop Fabian Bruskevitz has received during his tenure as Bishop of Lincoln, Nebraska. Bishop Bruskevitz has maintained a very faithful diocese that has been spared most of the damage that has been inflicted on the larger church by the abuse crisis brought about by the cruising behavior of gay clergy.

Do not get me wrong: There are very fine seminaries and there are very fine Roman Catholic bishops and priests. It is also true that Pope Benedict XVI has been appointing some very solid men to the episcopate during his pontificate. However, the damage that has been done to the Roman Catholic Church over the past several decades by modernists and a lavender mafia has been close to catastrophic. Further, it is foolishness to deny that these same people have established powerful networks that still insidiously function to advance their agenda in many dioceses within the United States and Europe.

To this I would say that, while the Anglican Catholic Church is not without its problems, it would be almost impossible to find a priest in the ACC who was not doctrinally solid, who did not hold have a deep respect for Sacred Scripture as the Word of God, and did not have proper Catholic understanding of the Sacraments. People who come to our church quickly discover this and are grateful that such a harbor as the ACC exists amidst the turbulent waters of the modern Christian world.

Fraternally yours in Christ,

The Shrinking Cleric+

Just a Dog...

2010-07-19T10:30:00.000-04:00

My sister, Adele, sent me this today. It was so good, I figured that I would share it.

JUST A DOG….

From time to time people tell me, “Lighten up, it’s just a dog,” or, “That’s a lot of money for just a dog.” They don’t understand the distance traveled, time spent, or costs involved for “Just a dog.” Some of my proudest moments have passed with my only company being “Just a dog,” and not once have I felt slighted. Some of my saddest moments were brought about by “Just a dog.” In those days of darkness, the gentle touch of “Just a dog” provided comfort and purpose to overcome the day.

If you, too, think its “Just a dog”, you will probably understand phrases like “just a friend,” “just a sunrise,” or “just a promise.” “Just a dog” brings into my life the very essence of friendship, trust, and pure unbridled joy. “Just a dog” brings out the compassion and patience that makes me a better person. Because of “Just a dog” I will rise early, take long walks and look longingly to the future.

For me and folks like me, it’s not “Just a dog.” It’s an embodiment of all the hopes and dreams of the future, the fond memories of the past, and the pure joy of the moment. “Just a dog” brings out what is good in me and diverts my thoughts away from myself and the worries of the day.

I hope that someday people can understand it’s not “Just a dog.” It’s the thing that gives me humanity and keeps me from being “Just a man or woman.”

So the next time you hear the phrase “Just a dog,” smile, because they “Just don’t Understand.”

U.S. Atheists Reportedly Using Hair Dryers to 'De-Baptize'

2010-07-18T14:48:00.001-04:00

FOXNews.com - U.S. Atheists Reportedly Using Hair Dryers to 'De-Baptize'

Just think what they could do with a curling iron!

Best of Friends

2010-07-13T19:49:00.000-04:00

Sam Franks and Frank Sams were the best of friends since they met at school and found that their names were almost opposite. They were always playing together as kids, and grew up to be great friends. They both got married and kept friends with each other, going down to the pub at weekends, drinking and chatting about the usual hassles and fun of life. Sam Franks owned a disco which sometimes both of them would go to on Fridays for a good time and free drinks as Sam Franks owned it.

But one night when Frank Sams was driving home to his wife after having a great time at the disco a lorry was out of control on the roads and crashed into his car, killing him virtually instantly. Frank Sams then found himself in heaven and able to see his dead relatives and be happy, but he was still feeling lonely without his best friend, Sam Franks, so he went to the Angel Gabriel and asked what the possibility of saying a last farewell to Sam Franks. Sam Franks was also very lonely without his best friend since school, Frank Sams, and said a little prayer to ask to see him for one last time. Angel Gabriel was contemplating whether to let Frank Sams go back to earth and see his best friend since school, Sam Franks, and as he was contemplating, he heard the prayer of Sam Franks asking to see Frank Sams one last time.

Gabriel then realised the strong friendship between the two, so he said to Frank Sams that he could visit earth and his friend, Sam Franks for one last time, for one night only. So Frank Sams was overjoyed at this piece of news and decided to visit Sam Franks on a Friday, where he almost knew he would be at his disco with his wife. Gabriel said to Frank Sams, "The only provisory that I let you go back to earth for one last night, is that you must take your wings, your golden harp and your halo with you, and you must bring them back." Frank Sams agreed and was then sent down to earth just outside of the disco that Sam Franks owned. As this night was a fancy dress type night, he decided to leave on his halo and wings so that he would fit in as another party goer, so he went in and saw his best friend ever, Sam Franks. Sam Franks was in tears as he saw his best friend ever, Frank Sams, walk over to him, they hugged each other (in that manly way). Many drinks were ordered, old times talked about, then they went for a final jive on the dance floor as Frank Sams said that this was the last time they would see each other. It came to closing time for the night, and the end of Frank Sams last visit to earth, so he hugged goodbye, walked out the door and was whisked away back up to heaven.

As it was Gabriel who was to meet him back and check all went well, he thanked Gabriel for the last chance to see his best friend, and Gabriel said "That's fine, I just have to check if you've not left anything behind.", Frank Sams said, "Yep, I've got my wings, my halo.. OH NO!

I've left my harp in Sam Franks' disco!!"

Some Hope in Hard Times

2010-06-10T21:11:00.002-04:00

In England, there was a town that had fallen on really hard times. Their primary industry had been their textile mills, but now the mills were all closed and unemployment was at an all-time high.

Desperate, the town's mayor looked frantically around for other industries to bring to his town. He found that there was a man in Germany who was looking for someone to take over his thriving hunting-dog breeding business. The man had made a fortune raising the animals, and was now willing to unload it for a fraction of its value, so that he could retire.

The mayor used his influence to have the mills converted to kennels and all of the dogs transported to his town. Employment skyrocketed and the town prospered. Everyone was happy, even though, sometimes--especially on the nights with a full moon--the animals got a little noisy, keeping some residents awake. But, even these unfortunate few learned to sigh and say,

"The mills are alive with the hounds of Munich!"

The Piano Tuner

2010-06-08T08:05:00.000-04:00

A man moved to another state where he didn't know anyone. In the move, his old piano was jarred, and of course it needed to be tuned when the man arrived.

So he asked around, and was told that Earl Opporknockity was the best piano tuner in the area. The man called Earl and hired him to tune his piano.

Earl had a keen ear and a deft touch, and did a wonderful job tuning the old piano. The man was able to play beautiful music once again, and was very pleased.

After a year or so the old piano started producing sour notes again. So the man called Earl, and asked him to come work his magic on the old piano again.

To the man's surprise, Earl refused, saying "Sorry, I can't accept the job."

"Why not?" the man wanted to know. "I'll pay you twice as much as last time if you'll just come tune my piano."

"Haven't you heard?" Earl asked, "Opporknockity tunes but once."

Mayonaisse Facts

2010-06-07T10:29:00.000-04:00

Thanks to Rich Appleby for forwarding this interesting piece of history to me.

Most people don't know that back in 1912 Hellmann's mayonnaise was manufactured in England. In fact, the Titanic was carrying 12,000 jars of the condiment scheduled for delivery at Vera Cruz, Mexico, which was to be the next port of call for the great ship after its stop in New York. This would have been the largest single shipment of mayonnaise ever delivered to Mexico. But as we know, the great ship did not make it to New York. The ship hit an iceberg and sank, and the cargo was forever lost.

The people of Mexico, who were crazy about mayonnaise and eagerly awaiting its delivery, were disconsolate at the loss. Their anguish was so great, that they declared a National Day of Mourning, which they still observe to this day.

The National Day of Mourning occurs each year on May 5th and is known, of course, as -

Sinko de Mayo.

It's Just Too Much

2010-06-01T13:02:00.000-04:00

In case you were longing for the joyful celebrations of the Olympics, don't be sad. The Episcopal Diocese of Los Angeles has provided some wonderful videos to help you remember those great times. Here's a link to the video of the pre-liturgical experience at this past weekends "consecration" of two "bishops". It's really worth the 40 minutes it takes to watch it. I believe that it is its own commentary.

LA_Webcast01.asx (video/x-ms-asf Object)

Coming out of blog retirement to announce a new favorite blog!!

2010-05-20T20:47:00.000-04:00

Yes, I know it's been a while since I have posted anything but this is too important to pass up. I come out of blog retirement to announce a new favorite blog site:

http://badvestments.blogspot.com/

This site must be seen to be believed!!!

Families forced to follow green zealots' new recycling diktats | Mail Online

2010-05-04T07:44:00.000-04:00

Families forced to follow green zealots' new recycling diktats | Mail Online

Christian Archaeologist Casts Further Doubt on Ark 'Discovery' | Christianpost.com

2010-05-03T13:38:00.000-04:00

Christian Archaeologist Casts Further Doubt on Ark 'Discovery' | Christianpost.com

American Thinker: Postmodernism: A Unified Theory of All the Trouble in the World

2010-05-02T17:23:00.000-04:00

American Thinker: Postmodernism: A Unified Theory of All the Trouble in the World

Survey: 72% of Millennials 'more spiritual than religious' - USATODAY.com

2010-04-27T18:01:00.000-04:00

Survey: 72% of Millennials 'more spiritual than religious' - USATODAY.com

Don’t talk to aliens, warns Stephen Hawking - Times Online

2010-04-25T19:30:00.000-04:00

Don’t talk to aliens, warns Stephen Hawking - Times Online

American Thinker: Liberty and the Death of God

2010-04-25T09:01:00.000-04:00

American Thinker: Liberty and the Death of God

American Thinker: Evil at Westboro Baptist Church

2010-04-25T09:00:00.000-04:00

American Thinker: Evil at Westboro Baptist Church

THE REMNANT NEWSPAPER: Hope The Lesson of the Cross

2010-04-01T12:12:00.000-04:00

THE REMNANT NEWSPAPER: Hope The Lesson of the Cross

From the American Thinker: The Abolition of the Family

2010-04-01T12:10:00.000-04:00

American Thinker: The Abolition of the Family

Some interesting articles offered without my usual pithy comments

2010-03-04T08:03:00.000-05:00

http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/02/american_christians_and_moral.html

http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/03/the_pathetic_god_of_environmen_1.html

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/article/20100302/NEWS02/3020372/-1/AMES/Wiccan-altar-puts-teacher-officials-at-odds

Vickie Gene Escapes "The Pretzel Hold"

2010-02-04T22:09:00.000-05:00

When I was younger, I remember the joke about a wrestler who was undefeated because he used the "Pretzel Hold". Only one wrestler ever escaped from it and, if you want to know how, you can google it.

Vickie Gene Robinson, the Episcopal Bishop of New Hampshire, recently came out with an interesting pronouncement. Apparently, when Saint Paul wrote of homosexual actions in Romans 1, the Apostle was referring to heterosexuals engaging in homosexual behavior. According to Bishop Robinson, Saint Paul had no way of knowing that there are people who are born with a genetic predisposition to same-sex attractions. So, therefore, there was no way that the Apostle could have known about homosexuality as we understand it today.

I'm not going to address Bishop Robinson's logic, there are others who will do that. What I do think is important is that we need to remember that Scripture is not bound or limited by its human authorship. There is a Divine author in every verse of Scripture. What this means is pretty straightforward: No matter what was in or not in Saint Paul's awareness, every word of Sacred Scripture can claim authorship from God.

Bishop Robinson can make whatever argument he likes regarding same-sex behavior. When he chooses a theological realm, he should be a little more careful about his understandings of inspiration and inerrancy.

Here's the link:

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/60952

They Say We Want an Evolution, We Just Want to Change the World...

2010-01-30T09:06:00.000-05:00

Apologies to the late John Lennon for the title. Here's an article from The Remnant, a traditionalist Roman Catholic newspaper. You'll go ape over it!

http://www.remnantnewspaper.com/Archives/2010-01310-John-Campbell-Evolution.htm

Another great article from the American Spectator

2010-01-30T08:59:00.000-05:00

http://spectator.org/archives/2010/01/26/obama-prepares-to-squander-ano

I've been struggling for a while to figure out why I find myself so irritated by the president. I know there are many reasons, but I was curious as to the root cause of my irritation. Leave it to Mr. Obama himself to assist me in finding the cause. He said in his ABC interview, "I think we lost some of that sense of speaking directly to the American people about what their core values are and why we have to make sure those institutions are matching up with those values."

To my mind, this statement represents the full expression of the president's hubris. I find it insulting that Mr. Obama believes that it is his job to tell us, the American people, what our values are or should be. It is his job to listen to us about our values and to adjust his positions accordingly. The arrogance of the man, his administration, and the radical left from which they come, is nothing short of astounding. They should be removed from office as soon as the electorate has the opportunity.

Septuagesima Sunday - Third Sunday before Lent

2010-01-30T08:36:00.002-05:00

    Today we begin the season of Pre-Lent. Pre-Lent is an almost forgotten season in today’s Christian calendar. In modern Christianity’s attempt to return to a more “primitive” observance, scholars who study Christian liturgy felt that Lent was sufficient and there was no need for this short three-week season of preparation that we begin today. Of course, this modern liturgical change reminds me of the following joke: Do you know the difference between a liturgist and a terrorist? Answer: You can negotiate with a terrorist. Of course, modern day liturgy scholars miss the point, as they usually do, that while Lent is a time to prepare for Easter, the Pre-Lent season is the time where we take stock of ourselves and of our Christian observance. It is a time when we examine the state of our souls to determine what kind of disciplines and penances will give us spiritual benefit in the upcoming Lenten season.

    Saint Paul understood the importance of spiritual preparation. In his first epistle to the Corinthians, he describes the Christian life as a race. Now this is a metaphor that would really resonate with the people of Corinth. Corinth was the home of the Isthmian Games, a series of games that were second only to the Olympics and were held in the years immeidately before and after the Olympic Games. The people of Corinth were proud of their games and were as devoted to them as Americans are to the Super Bowl, the World Series, and - in our case - Bulldog football.

    So when Saint Paul said, “Know ye not that they which run in a race run all, but one receiveth the prize?”, he knew that he was striking a receptive chord within the Corinthian people and he was putting the Christian journey in perspective. The Christian lives his faith in the same way that an athlete runs a race, with one important difference.

    In the same way that a Christian runs his race, he must first train for it. The athlete exercises and practices his sport until it becomes second nature to him. He works and works, repeating the same motions over and over again until they become burned into him. Fran Tarkenton was a great quarterback here at Georgia and he went on to become a member of the Hall of Fame for his outstanding pro career with the Minnesota Vikings and the New York Giants. He was asked once about how he became such a great passer. His reply was interesting. Tarkenton said, “When I was a kid, my father hung an old tire from a tree and set it swinging. I would stand fifteen yards away and throw the football at the swinging tire. I would do this for hours every single day, in season and out. I got so good at it that I began to try throwing the ball through the tire while it was swinging and I was running. It beat the boredom of standing in one place.” Hour by hour, day by day, Tarkenton practiced and mastered skills that would lead him to the pinnacle of athletic achievement. So it is with all of those who will stand in the glare of the winner’s circle.

    Yet the heights of athletic achievement last only so long and, sooner or later, records are made to be broken and new stars come along. As the poet says, “Do not expect that you can ever collect for the hero you used to be.” Saint Paul says that the athlete competes for a “corruptible crown.” It’s an antiquated term and it refers to the olive laurel wreath that champions in the Isthmian Games would win. Paul reminds us that laurel wreaths will wither and die, silver trophies will tarnish, that glories will fade along with the memory of the champion. In the old days, when popes were crowned, three times during the coronation ceremony, a hooded friar would approach the pope and - in the midst of magnificent pageantry - he would light some flax, blow it out and wave the stinky material under the new pope’s nose. As the pope would recoil from the pungent smell of burnt flax, the friar would pronounce solemnly in Latin, “Holy Father, thus pass the glories of the world.” A stern reminder of what Saint Paul tells us, “Now they do it to obtain a corruptible crown; but we an incorruptible.” We train for a prize that does not tarnish. We prepare for an Easter joy by purifying ourselves throughout Lent.

    In this season of Pre-Lent, we will take the time to prepare ourselves for our upcoming Lenten observance. We will look at our selves and see where we have fallen short of what God asks of us. We will determine with God’s help what it is we need to do to draw closer to him. And we will do so with good cheer, knowing that God is calling us to a prize that does not fade, to a peace that passes all understanding. We will enter Pre-Lent with good cheer, making our own the words of the hymn:

Awake, my soul, stretch every nerve,
And press with vigor on;
A heavenly race demands thy zeal,
And an immortal crown.

A cloud of witnesses around
Hold thee in full survey;
Forget the steps already trod,
And onward urge thy way.

’Tis God’s all animating voice
That calls thee from on high;
’Tis His own hand presents the prize
To thine aspiring eye.

Then wake, my soul, stretch every nerve,
And press with vigor on,
A heavenly race demands thy zeal,
And an immortal crown.

Time to Affirm the Affirmation

2010-01-04T20:16:00.001-05:00

Here's a neat blogsite created by Father John Roddy, Rector of St. Hilda of Whitby Anglican Catholic Church in Atlanta.

http://affirmationofstlouis.blogspot.com/

Here you will find the text of the Affirmation of St. Louis, the foundation document of continuing Anglicanism. Read it and, if you feel so moved, add your name and address to it. No comments on that blogsite, please.

OK, So Maybe It's Not All That Bad

2009-12-20T10:06:00.000-05:00

My friend, Quin Hilyer, informs me that any bill coming out of conference committee could be filibustered in the Senate! So maybe hope will spring eternal!

Why Ben Nelson Is a Liar: How to Sell Out the Unborn by Claiming to be Pro-Life

2009-12-19T16:37:00.004-05:00

This morning, Senator Ben Nelson (D-NE) announced that he was going to support the Senate Health Care reform bill. This bill, which no one outside of the Senate Democrat caucus has even seen, had been protested by Senator Nelson because it provided federal funding for abortion, something that has been prohibited because of the Hyde Amendment.

In his press conference, Senator Nelson announced that he could now support the bill because the pro-life position was being protect and that his state would receive a certain amount of Medicaid relief. So the Senator signs on to the bill because abortions will remain unfunded.

Well, not exactly.

The Senate version that will now pass in that chamber will almost certainly have provisions to prohibit abortion funding. After that, though, the fun really starts in Conference Committee.

When two bills are passed on a similar topic, one in the House and one in the Senate, the Constitution provides that they need to be reconciled into one bill by a Conference Committee of members of the House and Senate. These members come from the Committees that originated the legislation. The Conference Committee then produces a single piece of legislation that is voted on by a simple majority in each house without further amendment. The Conference Committee is not bound by any of the provisions in either of the two originating pieces of legislation and can add or subtract portions to the new bill.

Would it surprise anyone if a conference committee produced a bill that added back into it funding for abortions, along with a public option, along with death panels?

The bill would then go back to the House where it could be voted on without any further amendment. Then it's off to the Senate where Senator Nelson and others of his spineless ilk could bewail this new bill and vow that they could never vote for a bill that included such anti-life language. Then, he might just vote against it. By then it won't matter. All that will be needed is 51 votes in the U.S. Senate. Nelson can sputter and fume and vote against it, but the bill will pass with the readded abortion funding and be signed into law by the most pro-abort President in our history.

Now, do you really think that Senator Nelson is so naive that he lacks awareness of the procedures of Conference Committees and the powers that those committees have to change the bills? Do you really think that he is that ignorant, or is this posturing on his part to portray himself as a staunch pro-lifer to conservative Nebraskans in 2012 when he runs for reelection?

I'm betting on this: Senator Nelson is nothing othdr than a cynical politician who, while claiming to champion the right to life of the unborn, sells those very helpless little souls down the river for the filthy lucre of Washington largesse.

Great work, Senator. I hope that you can sleep tonight with an untroubled conscience.

Yet Another Attack on the Family in the Offing

2009-10-24T20:24:00.002-04:00

Mimi and I just returned from a magnificent vacation in Europe. We spent 10 days crusing the Mediterranean visiting Barcelona, Marseilles, Monte Carlo, Florence, Rome, Amalfi, Sicily, Malta, Santorini, and Athens. Our cruise on the Insignia of Oceania Cruises could not have been more enjoyable.

So, we're back!! And guess what? The world is pretty much just as we left it. Here's the latest political nominee who is outspoken in their radical desire to dismantle the traditional family.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/10/obamas_eeoc_nominee_would_rede_1.html

This was just what I wanted to see after almost two weeks of rest and relaxation.

Just what we've waited for: National Blasphemy Day!

2009-09-25T18:12:00.001-04:00

See the following link. No comment from me is necessary.

http://www.religionnews.com/index.php?/rnstext/next_week_blasphemy_gets_its_own_holiday1/

We're All Out of our Freaking Minds Now!

2009-08-18T13:39:00.002-04:00

Shortly after the election of President Obama, Newsweek published an issue with a red hand shaking a blue hand and the caption, "We're All Socialists Now." Newsweek has struck again, this time with an article entitled, "We're All Hindus Now." This article describes the slide in American religious thinking from Christian to something akin to Hindu. It's a sobering article and one that should be taken seriously by any serious Christian. No further comment is really necessary.

Here's the link:

http://www.newsweek.com/id/212155

More Reasons Why I Am an Anglican Catholic

2009-08-03T15:08:00.002-04:00

Here are some YouTube videos on some of the bizarre liturgical adventures in the Roman Church. It should be noted that many of these same liturgical adventures can be found in most other churches as well. However, thank God, they are NOT in the Anglican Catholic Church!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ovRwra4kzQ

Now here's one from the 2008 World Catholic Call to Action Conference. Catholic Call to Action was founded by liberals in the 1970's who were filled with hope that they could remake the church into a paragon of social justice. If there is a leftist cause, they have embraced it. This video (which I may have posted before) is from their closing Mass in 2008. To me, this is a perfect example of everything that can go wrong with a liturgy. Although it is tempting to only watch the video, listen to the words as well.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rh_nqtp3VrU&NR=1

Two Great Articles on "Caritas in Veritate"

2009-07-20T13:10:00.002-04:00

It is amazing to me that someone as brilliant as Pope Benedict XVI could produce an encyclical letter that was so incredibly uneven as Caritas in Veritate. This letter has managed to infuriate liberals and theological conservatives alike.

I finished the encyclical last night and found myself scratching my head at the inconsistencies, wondering if Benedict had relied more on a committee to construct this work than on his own thought.

I was going to write a piece on this and then found two great articles that summarize the problem quite well.

The first is by Catholic theologian George Weigel. Here's the link:

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NTgwOWY5MDkyNTIzNmQ0OTQ5NzAyMTJiNTU3MTAzN2M=

The second was sent to me by a parishioner. This is probably the most coherent critique of the encyclical and here is the link to it:

http://www.american.com/archive/2009/july/morals-markets-and-the-pope

It strikes me as a great pity that Benedict, whose first two encyclicals on faith and hope were outstanding, would close out the triad with a dissapointing effort.

Mesa Bravo: December 1, 1997 - July 10, 2009

2009-07-10T18:21:00.002-04:00

Mesa Bravo, our "Big Boy", died peacefully this evening at home in Mimi's and my arms. He was 11 and a half years old.

Bravo was a grade A racer at three different tracks, Flagler, Derby Lane, and Jefferson County Kennel Club. He won 19 races and finished in the money over 60 times in his career.
He was retired in the fall of 2002 and brought to the Southeastern Greyhound Club Kennel in Acworth.

One Saturday, a friend of ours in the Greyhound Club told me that there was a fantastic boy greyhound at the kennel if I was interested. The next day, I drove up to Acworth after church to help out with kennel maintenance. I walked up to Bravo's run and was immediately face-to-face with a beautiful red/gold-brindle and white boy who weighed about 85 pounds and was tall enough to pet without stooping. I took him out to do his business while his kennel was cleaned and on returning I sat down in the big overstuffed chair. Bravo came up to me and put a paw by each hip and then buried his head in my chest. Bravo had found a home and I had found my "Big Boy."

His transition to the house had some amusing moments. He and Magic our first greyhound got into a territory marking contest that ended with a humiliated Magic wearing a diaper and Bravo in a belly-band.

Weeks after Bravo had acclimated to the house, I was lying in bed on a Saturday morning when Bravo jumped up and plopped down on the bed. He was soon asleep, with his eyes rolled back in his head and his breathing slow and steady. He had never been in a bed before. We stayed like this for about an hour and a half before I had to get up. A little while later, Mimi got in the bed and called to me, "Honey, did you spill a glass of water in the bed?" I had not. Bravo, however, had become so relaxed that he emptied his bladder all over Mimi's side of the bed. Greyhounds are not familiar with our creature comforts.

Mimi gave Bravo to me as my Christmas gift in 2002. Bravo was the most beautiful dog that I have ever seen. He was sweet, smart, and incredibly loyal, always willing to protect his family. In December of last year, Bravo was severely bitten by a pit-bull and his injury was made much worse because he spent most of his effort shielding me from the dog.

He developed bone cancer about two months ago, although it was finally diagnosed in early July. He remained reasonably comfortable to the end.

Mimi and I will shed many tears for Bravo, but the tears will be more than outweighed by the wonderful memories of this majestic, loyal, loving greyhound. We will see him in heaven.

The picture is of Bravo and daughter Melanie, taken when she was 12 and Bravo had just come into our home.

Hi! Billy Mays here for...

2009-06-29T10:57:00.003-04:00

Probably one of the best pitchmen in the business has died at age 50. The big guy in the blue shirt, with his dyed black hair and beard, and high-pitched voice would enter my living room on a regular basis, "Hi, Billy Mays here for Oxi-Clean!" Or any one of a number of products.

Billy's career in sales was made by being identifiable as your next door neighbor. Over the years he aged like the rest of us. His agent or his vanity could dye his hair, but nothing could hide the belly that protruded over his belt.

Whereas Ron Popeel always was an instant channel switcher for me, Billy Mays fascinated me. Whenever he was on selling something, my attention would be as riveted as a four-year-old watching SpongeBob Squarepants. When it was announced that he would co-hosting a reality-show called "Pitchmen", I was in seventh-heaven.

By the way, if you're trying to get stubborn wine stains out of altar linen, "Hi, Billy Mays here for Oxi-Clean." Just soak your linens in an Oxi-Clean solution for one-half hour and then wash them as normal. Your linens will look as fresh as they did when they came from Almy! Thanks Billy! I owe you one.

I don't know what Billy's faith was, but I'll bet that if he's in heaven, he's pitching angel-wing cleaner even as we speak.

William D. "Billy" Mays, Jr.
1958-2009
RIP

Here's a neat segment of Billy ordering breakfast at McDonald's:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VtYdDK1uTDI

Some Summertime Reading

2009-06-15T07:02:00.002-04:00

I have a busy day ahead of me, but I want to post some links to articles to help you reflect on issues of our time.

First, George Neumayr shares some thoughts on the societal implications of the murder of late-term abortionist George Tiller:

http://spectator.org/archives/2009/06/12/scourging-at-the-tiller

Second, here's an article that parodies the difficulty of hiding from mainstream media and ties to it an unusual theme from Orwell's 1984:

http://spectator.org/archives/2009/06/12/who-are-jon-and-kate

Finally, here's Ken Connor's article, "Religious Liberty Stops at the Schoolhouse Door" from Townhall.com.

http://townhall.com/columnists/KenConnor/2009/06/14/religious_liberty_stops_at_the_schoolhouse_door

Sunday after Corpus Christi (Trinity I)

2009-06-14T21:35:00.002-04:00

The Holy Gospel is written in the 16th Chapter of Saint Luke, beginning at the 19th Verse.

There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day: and there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his gate, full of sores, and desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man's table: moreover the dogs came and licked his sores. And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried; and in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom. And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame. But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented. And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence. Then he said, I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldest send him to my father's house: for I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment. Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them. And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent. And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

------

In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.

If you study the Bible, you will quickly see that the Sacred Scriptures are filled with stories of triumph. There’s the triumph of the people of Israel in their exodus from Egypt. There’s the story of the resettling of the Promised Land after the Babylonian exile. And who can forget the great victory of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, as he rose from the dead, conquering sin and death and promising eternal life to those who believe on His Name. Yes, from the beginning to the end, from the Alpha to the Omega, the Bible is filled with stories of victory over adversity.

However, there is a dark side to the Scriptures. There are stories of great tragedy in the pages of the Bible. Adam and Eve eat the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, losing their innocence and their direct relationship with God. Later, Esau sells his birthright to his brother Jacob for what amounts to a bowl of vegetable soup. Samson is seduced by a woman, losing his special place with the Lord as a Nazirite, only redeeming himself after he has been taken captive and blinded. Strapped between two pillars, he summons all of his strength and brings down the building upon his enemies. Yes, in addition to triumph, there is tragedy in the pages of the Bible.

Today’s Gospel reading, the story of the Rich Man and Lazarus falls into the tragedy category, I’m afraid. As we will see, the Rich Man is condemned to an eternity of torment, punished for ever in Hell. Even worse, his request to father Abraham to send Lazarus to his brothers to warn them of their impending fate is rebuffed, with the horrible words, “If they hear not Moses and the Prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.” How did this man of wealth, this man of power, find himself in this terrible, terrible judgment?

The fate of the Rich Man is even more stunning when you realize that this is a man who had it all. The Bible tells us that he dressed in purple cloth and fine linen. Purple cloth and fine linen? Purple is the color of royalty, the color of kings. Purple cloth was extraordinarily expensive in part because the ingredients required to make the dye were rare and costly, and in part because only a few skilled craftsmen could blend the ingredients in a way that would make the dye into a deep and rich violet. Linen was another fabric that was often reserved to Kings and princes. Linen was then, as now, a pure fabric, one that wore easily on the skin, and one that absorbed the sweat that naturally came about in the heat of the ancient near east. Purple cloth and fine linen was the stuff of kings and in choosing these clothes, the Rich Man was arrogantly proclaiming himself to be the equal to royalty. The purple and linen spoke to the Rich Man’s desire to be seen as subservient to no one, answerable to no one, accountable to no one.

Indeed, in his arrogance and conceit the Bible tells us that the Rich Man would feast sumptuously every day. Now think about that. What would you say about a man who would travel with an entourage into Atlanta to Buckhead to spend hundreds of dollars every night at Bones or Ruth’s Chris? Would you wonder about his judgment? Would you wonder about his sense of propriety? But this man wouldn’t go to Buckhead to feast. No, he would gorge himself daily in his own home. Then, dressed as befits a King, he would come and go from his estate, passing through the gate of his property on his way to and from the city, where he would go to be seen in all of his glory.

And there, laying at the Rich Man’s gate, was the beggar Lazarus. Now, when the Bible says “laying at the Rich Man’s gate,” it means, in our terms, laying across the Rich Man’s driveway. In other words, it was impossible for the Rich Man to enter or leave his property without seeing Lazarus, in fact, without having to step over Lazarus. The Bible goes even further and says that Lazarus was so destitute and ill, that the dogs would come and lick his sores. Now, we’ve talked before about the dogs, remember? They weren’t licking Lazarus’ sores out of pity. No, they were trying to keep the wounds open and the flesh soft, so that when Lazarus finally died, the dogs would be able to feast in a way that Lazarus never could. What does Saint Luke tell us that Lazarus wanted? Nothing more than the crumbs that fell from the the Rich Man’s table. Not a full meal, just the scraps, just the stuff that we scrape of our plates into our dog’s bowls.

Then, Saint Luke tells us, both Lazarus and Rich Man die. Lazarus goes to heaven and the Rich Man is consigned to eternal torment. Why was sent to Hell? The Bible doesn’t tell us the nature of the judgment directly, but from the text we can immediately see a couple of reasons. First, the Rich Man never placed himself in right relationship to God. He presumed that he was the master of his own destiny and he arrogantly claimed for himself an authority that belonged only to God. Second, and closely related to the first, the Rich Man failed to recognize his neighbor Lazarus who laid in his driveway desperately hoping for the scraps that were fed to the dogs. Remember another passage, this one from Saint Matthew about the final judgment of the righteous and the unrighteous? Our Lord said to those unrighteous who stood at his left hand:

“Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels: for I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not. Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee? Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me. And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.”

And so it was that the Rich Man went to his torment, and Lazarus to his reward. The Rich Man consigned to a dominion where he would be forced into submission to demons and where his voracious appetites could never be satisfied. And Lazarus, given a peace and fullness that he had never known in this life.

If there is a lesson to be learned from this awful story, it is certainly not a pleasant or popular one. The lesson is this: Like it or not, agree with it or not, all of us will someday have to give account for our lives before Almighty God. All of us will have to answer and be judged for our deeds. What will that judgment find? Will it find us so wrapped up in our own pride, filled with the unbridled narcissism of the Rich Man? Or will that judgment find us humble before God, not claiming salvation as a thing that is our right, but praying that God will grant us the crumbs of mercy that fall from His table? Will our attitude be that of the Rich Man, who expected everything as his due? Or will our attitude be one of grateful thanksgiving for the gift of salvation that comes to us through our Lord Jesus Christ?

On this Sunday, as every Sunday, we have the opportunity to rededicate ourselves to God. We have the opportunity to “acknowledge and bewail our manifold sins and wickedness, which we, from time to time, most grievously have committed, by thought, word and deed, against the Divine Majesty of Almighty God.” And then, as Christians have done from time immemorial, we can approach the Altar to share in that Great Thanksgiving of the Body and Blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ. We can share in that heavenly banquet, where Christ feeds us with His Flesh and Blood. And in this Thanksgiving, in this Eucharist, we may be made whole and understand our place before God. In that Thanksgiving, we may see ourselves, not as the Rich Man arrogantly claiming his own freedom and living without regard to his neighbor. No, in this Thanksgiving, this Eucharist, let us pray that we may see ourselves as we truly are, sinners under the mercy of a loving God, sinners who have been forgiven and set free by the Body and Blood of their Risen Lord. So may it be now and always, world without end. Amen.

For It's One, Two, Three Strikes You're Out...

2009-05-21T07:14:00.003-04:00

One of the marks of Christianity, especially the Catholic kind, is it's respect for the dead. Recognizing that the human body has the capacity to be the Temple of the Holy Spirit, Christians have an appreciation of the value of God's handiwork, honoring the remains of the deceased because, like the soul, the body will rise again at the Last Day, renewed through the Resurrection of Jesus Christ.

One of the marks of our secular society is its hideous tendency to view the human body as a commodity. To the secular world, the body is a commodity that can be easily disposed of at will, at least at the beginning of the life cycle. At the end of the life-cycle, the secular materialist has to struggle with the question of meaning that they have avoided throughout life. What does one do to memorialize the human body which is, essentially, only a collection of material that accidentally came together in this form? The emptiness of materialism is found in its lack of respect for the human body, a body that was created in the image and likeness of God, and which finds its redemption in the very real, very physical Passion, Death, and Resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ. As Christians, we must pray for the triumph of the Spirit of God over the spirit of the Age. We must pray that all men will be enlightened by the grace of God and will see the body as the Temple it was designed to be.

See this interesting article by Michael Medved that provoked the above thoughts:

http://townhall.com/columnists/MichaelMedved/2009/05/20/after_death_decadence

Dan Brown's Angels & Demons: More than a Novel, It's a Way of Life!

2009-05-19T14:58:00.005-04:00

Ross Douthat has published an interesting column in today's New York Times. His column, entitled "Dan Brown's America", discusses the works of the popular novelist and how they tie into Mr. Brown's attempt to put forward a world-view that severely critiques traditional religion while at the same time expresses an appreciation for an individualized expression of faith that is all-inclusive.

Mr. Douthat writes:

"In the Brownian worldview, all religions — even Roman Catholicism — have the potential to be wonderful, so long as we can get over the idea that any one of them might be particularly true. It’s a message perfectly tailored for 21st-century America, where the most important religious trend is neither swelling unbelief nor rising fundamentalism, but the emergence of a generalized 'religiousness' detached from the claims of any specific faith tradition.

"The polls that show more Americans abandoning organized religion don’t suggest a dramatic uptick in atheism: They reveal the growth of do-it-yourself spirituality, with traditional religion’s dogmas and moral requirements shorn away. The same trend is at work within organized faiths as well, where both liberal and conservative believers often encounter a God who’s too busy validating their particular version of the American Dream to raise a peep about, say, how much money they’re making or how many times they’ve been married.

"These are Dan Brown’s kind of readers. Piggybacking on the fascination with lost gospels and alternative Christianities, he serves up a Jesus who’s a thoroughly modern sort of messiah — sexy, worldly, and Goddess-worshiping, with a wife and kids, a house in the Galilean suburbs, and no delusions about his own divinity.

"But the success of this message — which also shows up in the work of Brown’s many thriller-writing imitators — can’t be separated from its dishonesty. The “secret” history of Christendom that unspools in “The Da Vinci Code” is false from start to finish. The lost gospels are real enough, but they neither confirm the portrait of Christ that Brown is peddling — they’re far, far weirder than that — nor provide a persuasive alternative to the New Testament account. The Jesus of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John — jealous, demanding, apocalyptic — may not be congenial to contemporary sensibilities, but he’s the only historically-plausible Jesus there is."

The problem with Mr. Brown's view of religion is that it strives mightily to develop a system in which the believer can achieve union with God by conforming himself to this world. While that might be desirable from a human perspective, it is antithetical to true life in Jesus Christ. Saint Paul said it well in Romans 12:2: "Be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God."

Here's the link to the article:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/19/opinion/19douthat.html?_r=2

Five Operas I'd Take to a Desert Island

2009-05-11T21:48:00.002-04:00

I'm so tired of current events that I had to write something completely different.

Here's the question: Suppose you were to be stranded on a desert island. Further suppose that said desert island has electricity and a stereo system. What five opera recordings would you take with you? (If you don't like opera, you'll have to find your own island.)

Here are my five:

1. Puccini. La Boheme. Anna Moffo, Richard Tucker, Robert Merrill, Metropolitan Opera Orchestra and Chorus, Erich Leinsdorf conducting. Yes, it's old and has neither Pavarotti or Domingo, but it's still a beautiful performance and it was the first opera recording that I ever owned.

2. Wagner. The Ring of the Nibelungen. The Georg Solti recordings. Don't lecture me about the Ring being four operas, because it's really only one story and this is my favorite recording. The late Anna Russell said, "The Ring is the only grand opera that comes in the large, economy sized package."

3. Verdi. Rigoletto. Joan Sutherland, Luciano Pavarotti, Sherill Milnes, Richard Bonynge conducting. Verdi's finest opera sung magnificently.

4. Donizetti. L'Elisir d'Amore. Joan Sutherland, Luciano Pavarotti, Richard Bonynge conducting. Sutherland sounds a little old for Adina, but she has such a wonderful tone. Nemorino is the role that Pavarotti was born to sing.

5. Gounod. Faust. Mirella Freni, Placido Domingo, Nicolai Ghiaurov, Thomas Allen, Georges Pretre conducting. One of my favorite operas and this one is well casted, well played and well sung.

Oops. Just saw the news. I'm off to the island!

The Magician's New Trick

2009-02-26T15:06:00.003-05:00

The Magician announced his budget today. Fiscal responsibility is the Magician's new "abracadabra." When he pronounces "Fiscal responsibility," the United States federal budget proclaims a deficit of $1,750,000,000,000! What a trick!

The Magician says that he wants to help restore the economy. As any Harry Potter fan can tell you, this is backwards spell. The Magician doesn't want to restore the economy. He wants to destroy the economy and replace it with the one he wants. Cool slight of hand, no?

The Magician is announcing faith-based initiatives. But beware! The Magician wants to insert federal money into church programs and then, when the churches are on the federal dole, "Abracadabra," the Magician will tell them who they can hire, what they can teach, and who can receive the services of the church.

All hail the Magician! His deceptions are without end!

Here's the link to an article:

http://www.reuters.com/article/businessNews/idUSTRE51O6JA20090226?feedType=RSS&feedName=businessNews&rpc=23&sp=true

Watch the Magician

2009-02-10T12:07:00.003-05:00

Anyone who has ever stood in awe of a magician understands that the key to a successful trick is to distract the audience's attention from what is really going on. This works with all sorts of illusions. Every now and then, a truly spectacular magician comes to the forefront and puts on a show to end all shows.

Christians, pay attention to the Magician, please. While we are debating about the "Stimulus bill" have you noticed the number of radical pro-aborts that the Magician is making appear in key positions in our government? Has anyone noticed that while the Magician has us looking to the Stimulus bill, portions of it would forbid the use of public land for any sectarian purpose (read church's renting school auditoriums on Sunday, etc.)? Has anyone noticed that the house will vote on a bill that would allow Americans to travel to Cuba (encouraging a terroristic, atheistic regime)? Did anyone notice that the Magician has said he's all for religion, but not a religion that divides? That he favors a religion that helps with the great social issues of the day?

Many Christians love the Magician and they wanted to see the Magician's show. What none of them realized is that the greatest trick that the Magician will try to pull off is a disappearing act for Christian faith as we have always understood it. Now you see it, now you don't.

Just another set of isolated incidents?

2008-12-17T15:56:00.002-05:00

Computer failure at Citibank yesterday. See link:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081217/ap_on_bi_ge/citibank_outage_2

Computer failure at Toronto Stock Exchange today. See link:

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=081217184540.xwyr1ayl&show_article=1

I'm sure these are totally unrelated, but it is a disturbing coincidence, no?

We Must Protect the Children

2008-12-10T21:03:00.002-05:00

I think there are many things from which our children must be protected. Apparently, the editors of the Junior Dictionary of the Oxford University Press think so, too. These folks have decided that many words need to be removed from the dictionary because they are no longer relevant to the lived experience of the world. Here are some of the irrelevant words that are to be removed:

Abbey
aisle
altar
bishop
chapel
christen
disciple
minister
monastery
monk
nun
nunnery
parish
pew
psalm
pulpit
saint
sin
devil
vicar

Don't want our children exposed to irrelevance like this, do we? Sooner or later, they might think that this Jesus person was more than a myth.

Maranatha!

Thoughts about the Future

2008-12-09T22:36:00.005-05:00

Since the Obama election in November, I have sat amused as conservatives have talked about how to reconstitute the conservative movement. "We need to propose legislation that reflects conservative values," they say. "We need to try to block legislation that goes against our notion of limited government," they say.

They all seem to be blind to a sad reality: Our culture is now firmly liberal and post-Christian and will probably remain so for our lifetime. Why do I say this? It's simple: All one has to do is look at our education system. For more than three decades we have sat by and watched as hard leftists created the curriculum that has taught our children. We have sat by as teachers have usurped the role of parents in the education of their children on matters such as sexual behavior and family structure. We have sat by as our universities have dismantled any semblance of traditional liberal arts education. Most importantly, three decades worth of students have been exposed to all of this and many have been indoctrinated. These people are young and they now vote.

From a religious point of view, these people are all post-modernists and, if they claim to be Christian, most of them believe in a faith that would be unrecognizable to previous generations. Most of these young Christians, in fact, view faith and its ethics as a smorgasbord where you can pick those parts of faith that you like and disregard the rest. Most importantly, most of these folks deep down have rejected the fundamental tenet of Christian faith that faith in Christ is absolutely essential to salvation. According to them, even pagans who have knowingly rejected the Gospel of Christ can go to heaven.

Many would like to say that this will be Obama's fault. Deep down, though, we know that's not true. Barack Obama simply reflects the beliefs that mark this post-Christian generation.

Also, don't blame Barack Obama for the spiritual and cultural mess that we're in. When the universities and schools were being overrun with leftist ideology, Barack Obama wasn't in charge. When the conservative movement was being dismantled by profligate spending and compromise with people who sought to undermine it, Barack Obama wasn't in charge. When the country sat by and allowed almost 50,000,000 babies to be sacrificed at the altar of free choice, Barack Obama wasn't in charge.

No, we are the ones who were at fault because we saw all of this happening and did nothing about it but bitch.

So, conservatives, when the left proposes a massive expansion of government, don't be surprised and don't think there is anything that you can do about it. You can't. That ship sailed long ago.

When your health care is mandated by the government and rationed, don't be surprised and don't think there is anything you can do about it. You can't.

When you sit appalled at all the children that are killed in the abortion mills that will turn children into medical waste with the same efficiency that Hitler showed in turning Jews into smoke, don't be surprised and don't think there is anything that you can do about it. You can't. That ship sailed long ago.

And, Christians, when your lives become more constricted and you are even less able to express your faith in public and you no longer are able to work in certain professions because of your faith, don't be surprised and don't think there is anything that you can do about it. You can't. That ship sailed long ago.

Barack Obama did not create the mess that we are in now, but he will bring the mess that we are in now to its logical post-modern, pro-death, anti-Christian conclusion.

All that we can do as Christians is to recall that God is in charge and that, somehow and in some way, the destruction of our nation as it has existed is part of His inscrutable design.

Even so, come Lord Jesus!

-----

John Derbyshire wrote a great piece on nationalreview.com that carries this theme forward and ties it to the birthday of John Milton. Here's the link:

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NmNhMTQ3NzkyZjdhZTUxMGI0ZWU4YmQwMzJlYjY3MDI=

What On Earth Is He Talking About?

2008-12-09T22:13:00.002-05:00

I don't know about you, but I've always enjoyed Bob Dylan. I always thought I've understood his lyrics, but then I realized that I really have no idea what he's talking about. Not long ago I bought his album, Modern Times, and heard the song "Thunder on the Mountain." Finally I realized that I must not understand the lyrics, so I downloaded them. Let's take a look at them and see if we can make sense out of them.

Thunder on the Mountain

Thunder on the mountain, and there's fires on the moon
A ruckus in the alley and the sun will be here soon
Today's the day, gonna grab my trombone and blow
Well, there's hot stuff here and it's everywhere I go

I was thinkin' 'bout Alicia Keys, couldn't keep from crying
When she was born in Hell's Kitchen, I was living down the line
I'm wondering where in the world Alicia Keys could be
I been looking for her even clear through Tennessee

Feel like my soul is beginning to expand
Look into my heart and you will sort of understand
You brought me here, now you're trying to run me away
The writing on the wall, come read it, come see what it say

Thunder on the mountain, rollin' like a drum
Gonna sleep over there, that's where the music coming from
I don't need any guide, I already know the way
Remember this, I'm your servant both night and day

The pistols are poppin' and the power is down
I'd like to try somethin' but I'm so far from town
The sun keeps shinin' and the North Wind keeps picking up speed
Gonna forget about myself for a while, gonna go out and see what others need

I've been sittin' down studyin' the art of love
I think it will fit me like a glove
I want some real good woman to do just what I say
Everybody got to wonder what's the matter with this cruel world today

Thunder on the mountain rolling to the ground
Gonna get up in the morning walk the hard road down
Some sweet day I'll stand beside my king
I wouldn't betray your love or any other thing

Gonna raise me an army, some tough sons of bitches
I'll recruit my army from the orphanages
I been to St. Herman's church, said my religious vows
I've sucked the milk out of a thousand cows

I got the porkchops, she got the pie
She ain't no angel and neither am I
Shame on your greed, shame on your wicked schemes
I'll say this, I don't give a damn about your dreams

Thunder on the mountain heavy as can be
Mean old twister bearing down on me
All the ladies in Washington scrambling to get out of town
Looks like something bad gonna happen, better roll your airplane down

Everybody going and I want to go too
Don't wanna take a chance with somebody new
I did all I could, I did it right there and then
I've already confessed - no need to confess again

Gonna make a lot of money, gonna go up north
I'll plant and I'll harvest what the earth brings forth
The hammer's on the table, the pitchfork's on the shelf
For the love of God, you ought to take pity on yourself

Music and words by Bob Dylan
Copyright 2006 Special Rider Music

That's perfectly clear now, isn't it?

Some Random Articles

2008-12-09T10:02:00.004-05:00

Here are links to some articles that I thought were interesting. I post them here for your information.

---

(From the One Big Happy Family Department)

From The Financial Times

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7a03e5b6-c541-11dd-b516-000077b07658.html

---

(From the Let's All Grab a Piece of Pie Department)

From The Wall Street Journal

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122875608562688401.html

---

(Now from the Global Warming Department)

From The Ventura County Star

http://www.venturacountystar.com/news/2008/dec/08/rare-50-year-arctic-blast-sets-sights-on/

---

(From the It Worked for the Soviets Department)

From The International Herald-Tribune

http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/12/08/asia/china.php

---

(From the Why Can't We All Just Get Along Department)

From Telegraph.co.uk

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/pakistan/3688288/Pakistan-Were-ready-for-war-with-India.html

---

You might be saying, "Why, on a blog dedication to religion, psychology and popular culture, are you posting such an odd collection of articles without comment?"

The answer: Because these are the times in which we live. He who has ears to hear, let him hear.

From Defense of Tradition to Defense of our Persons

2008-11-19T12:03:00.003-05:00

Proposition 8 passed easily in the State of California. This ballot initiative defined marriage as a union between one man and one woman. It was vigorously opposed by gay activist groups who have responded to the bill's passage by attacking old women with crosses, threatening blacks, and disrupting church services. National Review Online's writer, economist Thomas Sowell, has published an outstanding article on this.

Mormons voted overwhelmingly in favor of Proposition 8, which is not surprising. The reaction of certain gay activists toward Mormons in general is described aptly in Sowell's article:

"In Oakland, California, a mob gathered outside a Mormon temple in such numbers that officials shut down a nearby freeway exit for more than three hours.

"In their midst was a San Francisco Supervisor who said 'The Mormon church has had to rely on our tolerance in the past, to be able to express their beliefs.' He added, 'This is a huge mistake for them. It looks like they’ve forgotten some lessons.'"

This should chill any American to the bone. Supervisors in San Francisco are similar to Commissioners in most counties, but with a lot more authority. That someone in a powerful position of government, albeit local government, could state that a church that is exercising a constitution right is "tolerated" indicates just how far our society, or elements of it, have drifted from core principles. Sadly, there are many others out there who agree with this thinking.

So, what's a Christian to do? The answer is simple: Pray, preach the Gospel as always, and do not allow bullies to keep us from bringing souls to Christ.

Here's the link to Sowell's article:

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=M2E1ODgyMDczMDA3NzkzY2E4YTNhNjgzMjk2NmEyOTY=

Adventures in Bad Liturgy

2008-11-17T14:23:00.002-05:00

This week's winner in the Adventures in Bad Liturgy is His Eminence, Christopher Cardinal Schoenborn, the Archbishop of Vienna. In this Mass for Youth, the Cardinal demonstrates such incredibly bad taste that it should remove all doubts as to why Anglo-Catholics value their liturgy.

Also, note the use of leavened bread in this liturgy. Only unleavened bread is valid matter for the Holy Eucharist in the Western Church. So here we have a Cardinal of the Church not only allowing a liturgical shipwreck, but also attempting to celebrate a Mass with invalid matter.

Here's the link to this liturgical travesty:

http://en.gloria.tv/?video=pwxa9jff7gs5kldzpiu7

You can't be serious, part 323,674

2008-11-11T07:35:00.003-05:00

In the 1970s, George Carlin came up with the seven bad words that can't be said on television. Now, as if governments don't have enough to do, the Bournemouth Council in the United Kingdom has banned....LATIN!! There are 19 phrases that these bright folks believe are elitist and should not be used.

Even George Orwell would have problems with these guys.

Here's the link to the article and the 19 phrases you can't say without sounding elitist:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1082427/The-councils-ban-Latin-words-elitist-discriminatory-confuse-immigrants.html#

Is the Time Growing Short?

2008-11-09T21:32:00.002-05:00

For years our pre-millenialist evangelical brethren, along with Catholic apocalyptic writers such as Michael O'Brien, have been proclaiming that we are on the verge of seeing the events that will ultimately bring about the Second Coming of Christ. It would be much easier to take these folks lightly if the events that they foretold for decades weren't coming true right before our eyes.

For instance, look at the following story about British Prime Minister Gordon Brown. Mr. Brown believes that now is the time to push for a "new world order," a global government.

Is that the sound of the hoof beats of the four horsemen that I hear in the distance?

Here's the link:

http://mobile.reuters.com/mobile/m/FullArticle/CBUS/nbusinessNews_uUSTRE4A900K20081110?src=RSS-BUS

Michael Crichton, RIP

2008-11-05T23:20:00.003-05:00

I don't read much fiction. I seem to lack the patience for it. One notable exception was the work of Michael Crichton. His works always had wrestled with the ethical questions that exist on the intersection of science and human experience, particularly the world of hi-tech commerce. Although his literary style was criticized by some, I found his work to be delightful and thought-provoking in always unusual ways.

Chrichton died today in Los Angeles after battling cancer. He was 66 years old. RIP.

Here's the link to his obituary:

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20081105/D9492EJ80.html

All Saints Day

2008-11-04T18:39:00.001-05:00

The Lesson is written in the 7^th Chapter of The Revelation of John the Divine, beginning at the 2^nd Verse.

And I saw another angel ascending from the east, having the seal of the living God: and he cried with a loud voice to the four angels, to whom it was given to hurt the earth and the sea, saying, Hurt not the earth, neither the sea, nor the trees, till we have sealed the servants of our God in their foreheads. And I heard the number of them which were sealed: and there were sealed an hundred and forty and four thousand of all the tribes of the children of Israel. After this I beheld, and, lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and peoples, and tongues, stood before the throne, and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands; and cried with a loud voice, saying, Salvation to our God which sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb. And all the angels stood round about the throne, and about the elders and the four living creatures, and fell before the throne on their faces, and worshipped God, saying, Amen: Blessing, and glory, and wisdom, and thanksgiving, and honour, and power, and might, be unto our God for ever and ever. Amen. And one of the elders answered, saying unto me, What are these which are arrayed in white robes? and whence came they? And I said unto him, Sir, thou knowest. And he said to me, These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb. Therefore are they before the throne of God, and serve him day and night in his temple: and he that sitteth on the throne shall dwell among them. They shall hunger no more, neither thirst any more; neither shall the sun light on them, nor any heat. For the Lamb which is in the midst of the throne shall feed them, and shall lead them unto living fountains of waters: and God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes.

The Holy Gospel is written in the 5^th Chapter of The Gospel according to Saint Matthew, beginning at the 1^st Verse.

Jesus, seeing the multitudes, went up into a mountain: and when he was set, his disciples came unto him: and he opened his mouth, and taught them, saying, Blessed are the poor in spirit: for their's is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are they that mourn: for they shall be comforted. Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth. Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness: for they shall be filled. Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy. Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God. Blessed are the peace-makers: for they shall be called the children of God. Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness' sake: for their's is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake. Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for great is your reward in heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you.

In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.

Today is the feast of All Saints. Today, we celebrate the saints of God who dwell in the glory of God the Father.

We celebrate the lives of the Saints all the time in our church. If you look at our calendar, our calendar is just chock full of days when we call to mind those great people who have lived in times past.

In March, we celebrate the feast of Saint Thomas Aquinas, probably the greatest thinker the Church has ever known and a man whose grasp of theology and philosophy still stands as the hallmark of much Christian theology.

In June we celebrate the feasts of Saint Peter and Saint Paul. Saint Peter, of course, is the rock of the Church. He is the rock on whom the Church is built. Saint Paul was the first theologian of the faith. He was the first Apostle who, because of his training, his ability to articulate the faith, and his selection to be an apostle by the Lord, gave a theology that defined Christianity at its very beginning.

In October, we celebrate the feast of Saint Francis of Assisi. Saint Francis of Assisi, as we all know, used to preach to the birds and he liked animals. Along the way, he founded a major religious order that had a lot to do with the renewal of the Church in the early part of the 13^th Century. We’ll talk about him more in a few minutes.

We celebrate those great Saints on the days of their death. When we celebrate a Saint’s day, we celebrate it on the day of their death, because that is the day they entered into heavenly glory.

But on this day, we do something different. Today we remember all those men and women who have lived in the service of God and now dwell in His presence. In other words, we celebrate the entire choir of Saints whose task now is the praise and glory of almighty God.

To fully understand that, we have to understand something about what we mean by the term “Saint.” “Saint” has a lot of different usages. On the one hand, we use the term “saint” colloquially, ranging from complimenting people for their good deeds by saying, “What a saint.” Another example of this colloquial use of the term is the New Orleans Saints of the National Football League. We have songs that we sing about Saints. Colloquialism aside, in Christianity we use the term in, essentially, two ways.

There are two types of saints. There are Saints with a big “S” and there are Saints with a little “s.” By definition, all Saints are people who have died and are in heaven with Christ. That’s what a Saint is.

The first type of Saint is the capital “S” Saint. These are the big Saints, the ones that are proclaimed by the Church definitively to be in heaven. These are folks like Saint Peter, the Saint Paul, Saint James, Saint Thomas, and Saint Benedict. These are the kind of folks whose live shine across the centuries as beacons of the faith.

But then there are other kinds of Saints, the kind who are small “s” Saints. These number in the ten thousand times ten thousand. These stand before the throne of God and none of us have ever heard of them or will hear of them, and the world never even noticed that they were there. They were the men and women who quietly went about their daily life, going to work, raising their families, trying to live as Christ would have them live. And when they died, they were buried with hardly any notice by any one outsideof their family or their little circle of friends. But God noticed, and now they dwell with him for ever.

And then there are thousands and thousands, ten thousands of ten thousands who we never have heard of, who, because of their faith, were called upon to shed their blood for Christ. After their deaths, their bodies were cast away into pits, thrown out for wild animals to eat, or just left out on the ground to rot. No one has ever heard of them, no one ever will hear of them, and no one on earth will notice that they were there. But God noticed and they dwell with him now for ever.

And so, on this day, we remember all the Saints, great and small, known and unknown, who by their witness have provided us with a guide toward holiness, with a guide toward sanctity.

Earlier I mentioned Saint Francis of Assisi. Saint Francis of Assisi is an interesting story and provides an interesting example to us of sanctity.

But before we can tell his story, we have to think about a problem that we have with the story of the great saints. That is our tendency to view the lives of the great saints from halo backwards. In other words, we see their pictures with the haloes around their head, standing in great holiness, much like St. Stephen in the portrait to my left here. We looking at their lives backward through the halo to their birth. But I think when we look at the story of a great saint it’s belpful to look at how they went from their birth to become great Saints.

So, looking from birth to halo, let’s look at the life of Saint Francis.

Saint Francis was born in the city of Assisi. He was the son of a nobleman, he was a member of an extremely powerful family. He was raised to be a warrior, a knight, and there was nothing, believe me, nothing that Francis liked better then to go out to war, to battle, and to fight. We know that he was brilliant with a sword. We know also that he was brilliant with the ladies and brilliant with a bottle. He was, in short, what you would expect from a knight. By the way, he’d been baptized, received his first communion and all of the normal events that you would expect from a Catholic Christian in his day. But he did these things because they were socially acceptable, not out of any religious conviction.

And then one day he went out to fight. In that battle, an opponent’s sword cut him severely in the chest, barely missing his heart, and damaging his lung. As he was carried back to Assisi, it was presumed that he would die because, if the wound itself didn’t kill him, the infection probably would. Day in and day out, week in and week out, Francis lay in a delirium, in that state of consciousness that lingers somewhere between life and death.

Miraculously, Francis recovered. One day, he was wandering through the little town and he came upon an old church. It was a church that had fallen down in absolute rubble. It was the Church of San Damiano. The only thing that was left standing in the little church was an iconic crucifix, a Greek-styled crucifix that hung above the old altar of the church. As Francis walked into the dilapidated building, he heard a voice calling him. “Francis,” it said, “rebuild my church.”

Francis was stunned. But he did as the voice commanded and single-handedly took brick after brick, stone after stone, and he rebuilt the little church of San Damiano.

Then he realized that that voice was calling him to more than just rebuilding the little church. It was calling him to rebuild the entire Church of God, which had stagnated into a rigid system of clerical power and privilege. So Francis shed all of the trappings of his wealth, put on a ratty old brown robe, tied a belt around his waist, and took off his shoes. And he walked shoeless through town after town proclaiming the Gospel of Christ in poverty.

I would love to say that the people who saw him said, “Francis, that’s wonderful. You’re just fantastic. Isn’t it great that you’re doing all of this.”

But that’s not what they said. They said, “You’re crazy. Who do you think you are going against the tide? What is it that you think you are doing?”

And they would say things behind his back like, “Poor Francis. You know, he’s never been the same since he came back from the war. He’s just gone crazy.”

During all that time, Francis would preach to the birds, but not because he had any deep abiding love of them. When he was asked about this odd practice, Francis’ temper would flare and he would respond, “I would rather preach the Gospel to the ravens who pick the eyeballs out of the dead than preach to people who will not hear it.”

I don’t think I’d try that kind of preaching style, but Francis did.

Later he started a religious order that in its time and too this day has transformed Christianity.

So what does the life of Francis teach us about how to become a Saint? The first thing is this: we become saints by doing the things that God puts in front of us to do. Not necessarily what we want to do, but what God puts in front of us to do.

Then, the Gospel tells us something else about how to become a Saint. If you want to become blessed, this is how you do it. The Gospel says, “Blessed are the poor in spirit; blessed are they that mourn; blessed are the meek; blessed are they that hunger and thirst after righteousness; blessed are the merciful; blessed are the pure of heart; blessed are the peacemakers; blessed are they that are persecuted for righteousness’ sake; blessed are ye when men shall revile you and persecute you and say all manner of evil against falsely for my sake.” That’s the nine-step biblical plan for how to be a saint.

Do what is put before you and then know that you are blessed when you are poor in spirit. Know that you are blessed when you are all alone because the world goes in one direction and you go another. That’s how you become a saint.

And the reward of sanctity is glorious. The Book of Revelation tells us clearly, “Therefore are they before the throne of God and serve him day and night in his temple. They shall hunger no more. Neither thirst anymore. Neither shall the sun light on them nor any heat. For the Lamb which is in the midst of the throne shall feed them and shall lead them unto living fountains of water and God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes.”

That’s how we become saints and what the saints have for a reward. Sanctity is an incredible thing and it is that reward for which we hope. It is that reward for which we long, to stand in that choir of saints. And we have a God that makes that possible for us.

Saint Paul tells us, “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the God who has made us worthy to share in the lot of the saints in light.” That same light which Saint John says, comes from no lamp, nor does it come from the sun. The light which comes from the Lord Jesus Christ, the light which shines in all of our hearts.

God has made us worthy to share in the lot of the saints in light. God has made us worthy to be blessed in proportion of our sufferings for him.

Our feast of All Saints today gives us a model that tells us that what these great people have achieved and what these people of anonymity have achieved, we can achieve, too. This holiness is something that can be in our lives and in which we may dwell for ever. That God, who has created the heaven and earth, has made a special place for us, and has made us worthy to share in the lot of the saints in light. That God has given us the path that, if we follow it in faith, will make us one with him for ever.

In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.

Barak the Antichrist? Probably Not.

2008-11-04T09:09:00.002-05:00

Every time I get ready to write an article on a subject, someone comes along and says what I want to say. The real problem for me is that they say it so much better than I could.

What follows is an example. A few weeks ago I planned to write a post about the stuff being posted on the web saying that Barack Obama is the foretold Antichrist. I don't believe he is, by the way, and I'm not sure that any Christian alive today will ever know who he is. But that is a story for another post. I do think that Obama is a very good warm up act for the Man of Sin.

Roman Catholic writer Michael O'Brien who addresses this question quite well. He is the author of some very powerful apocalyptic fiction and is most known for the book Father Elijah. O'Brien especially focuses his attention on Roman Catholics who are supporting Obama although his words could be directed at most Christians of any stripe.

Here's the link to O'Brien's post:

http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/nov/081103a.html

And they wonder...

2008-11-03T13:41:00.004-05:00

I received a blast e-mail from a friend this morning that was a pretty typical anti-Obama piece. It was fairly humorous but, as is my general practice, I didn't read the whole thing and summarily deleted it.

About an hour later, I received a response from someone who had obviously hit Reply All. (I hate the Reply All button.) This person had been included on the blast list and they felt an uncontrollable urge to share their thoughts with all of us on the list. The response went like this (with my friends' names removed): "Please don’t include me in any more of these emails. I love you dearly, but I don’t want anyone to think that my inclusion means that I support your politics. I do not."

Since I have never heard of this person before, I was a bit curious about why I should even give a darn about whether she agreed with my friends' politics. I concluded that I didn't and I responded to her asking her to be careful about pressing Reply All and sending her e-mail to people like me who couldn't care less about her agreement or disagreement.

She also enclosed a link to a website that tries to justify Barack Obama's positions with Roman Catholic theology. Their efforts would be much more humorous if these people weren't serious. I will not forward the web address because I don't want to give them even the minuscule publicity that my mention might cause.

Later I started thinking this situation and was struck by the incredible arrogance and irony of this woman's position. This woman is a Director of Youth and Young Adult Ministry at a large Roman Catholic Church in Cincinnati, Ohio. However, as a Catholic pastoral minister she is supporting the most Pro-Abortion candidate in the history of the Democrat Party. She is supporting a Democrat who even believes that children who survive abortions should not receive medical care.

Now the argument that this women and those who agree with her would put forward goes something like this: Abortion is one of many issues facing the electorate this fall. We really should view the totality of the candidate's positions and vote accordingly rather than base our vote on a single issue. Besides, they say, Barack Obama will make abortion more rare, whatever that means. The fact that Barack Obama has pledged to support the most sweeping legislation lifting all restrictions on any form of abortion, the Freedom of Choice Act, seems to escape her and her friends' notice.

If the single issue were something along the lines of immigration or taxation, then I might be likely to agree that we should be look at the whole picture. But this single issue is far more critical and basic. The issue of abortion strikes directly at the fundamental right that each person enjoys: the right to life.

Since 1973, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimate that our country has been responsible for the deaths of 44,600,000 babies (through 2006) through the grotesque procedures of abortion. Now think about this for a second: Our country has been complicit by its policies in approximately 3.5 times more deaths than Hitler!

For any thinking Christian not to realize that the issue of abortion is a fundamentally important issue that trumps all others is amazing to me. That a Pastoral Associate for Youth Ministry in a Roman Catholic parish could blindly support the most radical pro-abort in American politics is scandalous. That she would proudly declare her support of this radical pro-abort smacks of incredible hubris.

Further, that a person in a position of leadership in Youth Ministry (where she is, presumably, forming young people) in a Roman Catholic parish could support such a candidate reflects one more reason why serious Christians, such as those of us who are traditionalist Anglicans, find the American Catholic church to be riddled with hypocrisy and unable to be taken seriously. While there are some very strong Catholic Christians, and I know a number of them, there are many milquetoasts out there who are quite willing to sacrifice their faith and lives of the innocent for political expediency.

God bless the bishops, clergy and laity who stand up for life. We must pray for those who work in the churches who show their implicit agreement to compromise life by their willingness to put a political agenda before the the lives of the most innocent among us.

To those who support this pro-abort Democrat, please remember that a person who is willing to deny the right to life can deny any right.

Updated Post: Bishops With Spines!

2008-10-31T21:06:00.001-04:00

Today I updated my post from a few days ago, "Bishops With Spines." I added an appropriate graphic. See below.

Christ the King

2008-10-27T20:40:00.002-04:00

The Holy Gospel is written in the 18th Chapter of Saint John, beginning at the 33rd Verse.

Pilate entered into the judgment hall again, and called Jesus, and said unto him, Art thou the King of the Jews? Jesus answered him, Sayest thou this thing of thyself, or did others tell it thee of me? Pilate answered, Am I a Jew? Thine own nation and the chief priests have delivered thee unto me: what hast thou done? Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence. Pilate therefore said unto him, Art thou a king then? Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am a king. To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth. Every one that is of the truth heareth my voice.

-----

In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.

As I mentioned to you earlier, today is the feast of Christ the King.

This day is one of the newest feasts on the Christian calendar, having come to us in the latter part of the second decade of the 20th century. It came about because of a strange and deadly event.

The strange thing happened in October of 1917. The Russian government which had been a long-standing monarchy fell to what became Soviet communism. The Soviets had a very perverse and deadly philosophy that said that there was no God. That God existed, as Karl Marx had said, as an “opiate for the people.” And that the promise of heaven was something that had been invented simply to keep people happy and docile as they worked their way through the world for the benefit of the elite. It was, shall we say, the ultimate class-warfare argument.

Shortly after that, in 1925, Pope Pius XI created the feast of Christ the King and placed the feast on the very last Sunday in October. He placed it there for a simple reason: He wanted to make a final and definitive statement that, all appearances to the contrary, that Christ was the Lord of all things, both in heaven and on earth and under the earth. That all things ultimately stand under the authority of Jesus Christ, the second Person of the divine Godhead.

So on Christ the King we bring the season of Trinity almost to a dead stop. We put away our green vestments, bring out the royal gold, and celebrate this day to remind ourselves, especially to remind ourselves as Christians, Who is really in charge.

You know, things are not always what they seem. David Copperfield can make an elephant seem to disappear. He can make a building seem to disappear. However, elephants and buildings do not disappear because of a parlor trick.

When my wife and I were on a cruise, there was a magician who could take a deck of cards and he could make these cards do things that were statistically impossible. It was such an incredible trick, that I even wanted to sit as close to him as I could to see how it was done. The reason why? Things are not always what they seem.

Magicians create illusions. They blur the distinction between reality and illusion. They make you think that what is real is actually the opposite.

Now in the case of our Gospel reading today, we have the reverse. In this case the illusion is the starting point. Jesus stands before Pilate and appears to be weak and helpless and Pilate appears to hold all the cards. But that, my brothers and sisters, that is the illusion

Now any reasonable person in this situation seeing Jesus before Pilate, would have to say that Jesus was not the one with the power. After all, he had been taken captive by the Jews and Herod’s soldiers. He had been beaten and was probably a bloody pulp.And he was brought before Pontius Pilate, who was the Roman governor of the whole province.

Think about that for a minute.

It’s hard for us to realize just how powerful the Romans were. They controlled everything and their governors had the power to give life or demand death, whatever they wanted. A Roman governor could just do this on a whim: “Put that guy to death. Let’s go have lunch.”

It was that simple for them.

What is it that Pilate, standing there before this beaten man, says to Jesus? He says, “So, then, are you a king?”

“Are you a king?”

You can almost hear the sarcasm dripping from his voice. “Are you, this bloody man in front of me, this little carpenter from Nazareth, are you saying to me that you are a king of the Jews?”

Any reasonable person in Jesus’ position would have said, “No, my Lord, I’m no king. This is all a mistake. Please let me go. Please don’t kill me. Torture me, if you want, but just let me live.”

But Jesus, standing before Pilate, says something very different. What he says essentially is this: “No. I’m not a king of the Jews. But I am a King. My kingdom is not of this earth. And if my kingdom were of this earth then my people and my soldiers would be here fighting for me. My kingdom is of far more than this earth.”

Saint Paul tells us about Jesus and his kingdom in our Epistle. He says that Jesus, this same Jesus who stands bloodied before Pilate, “…is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature. For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in the earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him and for him: and he is before all things, and by him all things consist.”

Later on, in his epistle to the Philippians, Saint Paul describes the kingship of Christ in terms that make clear Jesus’ confrontation with Pontius Pilate. Saint Paul says, “Though he was in the form of God, Jesus Christ did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. And being found in human form he humbled himself and became obedient unto death, even death on a cross. Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.”

What a powerful statement.

What an incredible thing that the Word of God, that the Logos of God, who by his very speaking brought the heavens and the earth into existence. Who by his very speaking brought man and woman out of the dust. By his very thought knew each and every one of us by name before we were even in the womb. That this very Word becomes one of us, taking the form of slave. That this very Word of God is willing to humble himself to stand bloodied before a Roman governor, before a Roman governor who owes the fact of his very existence to this same humble and beaten man.

Why does Jesus, our Lord and King, the One through whom all things were created, why does He humble himself to accept even death, death on a cross?

He does it to set us free from our sins.

His kingdom is not of this world. His kingdom is an everlasting kingdom. His kingdom is not restricted by geography, it is not restricted by time, it is not restricted by rulers, it is over all things from everlasting to everlasting.

Maybe this is a good time in our national history to think about the kingship of Jesus Christ. As we go into an election to decide our nation’s next leader, maybe this is a good time to gain some true perspective and ask ourselves: Who is really in charge? Who do I, as a Christian, really serve and honor as my Lord?

Maybe it’s time to understand that the real challenge which confronts every person and every nation is: When will we bow the knee to Jesus and acknowledge him as our sovereign Lord? Will we do it now, while we live and have the ability to give our will to him in all freedom? Or will we do it later, when we are forced to our knees to acknowledge him as our Judge?

To whom do we owe our allegiance? Do we owe our allegiance to something that is bound by this time and this place? Or do we owe our hearts to that One, who is God and who comes from God, who is Jesus Christ our King, and who exists to set us free from sin now and for all time.

In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.

Some Great Stuff from Focus on the Family

2008-10-22T22:40:00.002-04:00

Stuart Shepard, the talented creator of Stoplight, has a great perspective on polls and the coming election.

Check this out here:

http://www.citizenlink.org/Stoplight/A000008486.cfm

Ever wonder how things will look in the 2012 after four years of President Obama? FOF has an interesting perspective on this with a letter from the future. Read and weep. Better yet, read it and vote.

Here's the link:

http://focusfamaction.edgeboss.net/download/focusfamaction/pdfs/10-22-08_2012letter.pdf

Finally, Bishops With Spines!!

2008-10-13T22:24:00.006-04:00

I've been a little tough on Roman Catholic Bishops of late. I suppose that I will now have to eat some crow.

To me, the absolute defining issue of this presidential campaign has been abortion, even though no one is really talking about it. I have always believed that a person who denies a baby the right to life is capable of denying anything to anyone. Add to that, Barack Obama's absolutely radical abortion stance (including infanticide) and there is no way that I could vote for a Democrat, particularly Barry Obama. Make no mistake, Barry will appoint judges all throughout the Federal bench who will guarantee that Roe v. Wade remains the law of the land for generations to come. Barry will further sign the Freedom of Choice Act and he says that will be his top priority. This act will effectively federalize the entire abortion issue and remove any "reproductive rights" practice from the control of the states. Scared yet?

John McCain is no prize, either. He's been wrong on taxes, although he says he's seen the light. He's been wrong on energy, although he says he's seen some of the light (ANWR is still in the dark for him).He's wrong on immigration. He's wrong on climate control. He is wrong on the $700,000,000,000 bailout (actually $830,000,000,000). He's abrasive and seems to really enjoy ticking off every conservative in the country, if not the world.

BUT...

John McCain is PRO-LIFE. That's enough for me. I'll pull the lever for him for that reason only.

Now, back to the bishops. Bishops Farrell of Dallas and Vann of Fort Worth have issued a brilliant statement that says that although there are many issues that are important to the election, abortion is an issue that trumps all the others. They go so far as to say, "To vote for a candidate who supports the intrinsic evil of abortion or “abortion rights” when there is a morally acceptable alternative would be to cooperate in the evil – and, therefore, morally impermissible."

Compare this to Pastor Brady Boyd, who heads New Life Church in Colorado Springs, Ted Haggard's former church. In an article in the New York Times (or, as Mark Levin aptly calls it, The New York Slimes), reporter Timothy Egan says this regarding Pastor Boyd, "Boyd is ...saying that the environment, the poor, and helping those in his church who’ve lost a job or a house are things that matter to his congregation.

"Abortion? Homosexuals? Bill Ayers?

“'To be focused on those things at a time when people are hurting would really be to the detriment of families,' said Boyd."

Yes, I really equate losing money in my 401k, seeing my housing price drop, and facing greater economic uncertainty as being far more important than whether some innocent little blob of protoplasm, otherwise known as a human being, gets to live. And God knows abortion is not to the detriment of families. Maybe Pastor Boyd needs to re-read Genesis or any other book of either testament.

Shame on Pastor Boyd. Thank God for Bishops Farrell and Vann. May their tribes increase.

Here's the link to their letter:

http://www.fwdioc.org/img2/homepage_items/joint_statement_eng.pdf

Some Thoughts on Fear

2008-10-06T07:01:00.001-04:00

Debby Morgan is a friend of Mimi's (my wife). Recently, she sent a piece to Mimi that was so impressive, I asked her permission to post it here. She graciously agreed, so here it is.

----

Some Thoughts on Fear
by Debby Morgan

In light of the upcoming election, I think we all need to remember several things. First of all, I do believe it is our responsibility to vote, but we have to leave the outcome in the hands of our Heavenly Father. Many are expressing fear that the wrong person might be elected President. I was one of those. When I realized that I was afraid, I had to ask myself, of what was I afraid?

If we are truly putting our trust in the Lord, then we need not be afraid of anything—fear is a sin and is the opposite of faith.

Sometimes I think we are afraid of the unknown, but the whole aspect of faith involves the unknown--being certain of things not seen, being certain that we have a God in heaven who loves us with a perfect love, and if His love for us is perfect then nothing is to happen that is not part of His plan for our lives. Trusting Him in the unknown, and not being afraid of anything is the essence of true faith.

Is our trust in our government, or in the one and only true God? No matter who wins the election, our God in heaven is still the same yesterday, today and tomorrow—He is never changing, and to me that is awesome!

I do not believe we know what God’s will for this election, yes, it would seem that it is His will that it would be for a man of His principles to be elected; but the times of the greatest oppression have produced some of the greatest revivals in history. We have been spoiled, living in this free nation, and we have taken for granted many things—maybe we will begin to experience really hard times in this United States; but would that be so bad? WE have taken so many things for granted that our nation is turning away from God, doing hideous things and making a mockery of His holy name. Maybe it is time for God to turn His back on us, as we have done Him, in hopes that in desperation, we will cry out to Him and beg for repentance and mercy, of which His supply is vast.

In the book of James we are told to count it all joy when we have trials, joy because we know God will use it to strengthen us and refine us as pure gold. Are we to desire a life of comfort, or a godly life, a life that brings God glory no matter what life’s trials may bring? Can we honestly pray and ask God to work His will in our lives, NO MATTER WHAT may happen?

The Israelites did not know from day to day whether or not God would tell them it was time to take up their tents and move. For those of us, like myself, who like to have our lives all neatly planned out months in advance, the unknown is a scary thing, but maybe it is time for us to live out our faith in a moment by moment dependence on God and knowing that whatever time brings, whatever comes in our life, He will give us the grace and strength to endure. He promises grace for the moment, not for what has not yet happened. That is why we get fearful, because we are looking ahead to unknown circumstances and taking our eyes off the Lord.

Seek ye first the kingdom of God, not seek ye first a Christian government, not seek ye first quality healthcare, not seek ye first our rights, not even seek ye first our 401Ks and retirement plans, but seek ye first God’s Kingdom! And all these things will be added unto you (the necessities of life).

I have to confess that I have not been putting my faith in God first in my life. My faith has been in my comfortable life that I have been living in this United States. You know how I know that? Because the thought of losing these freedoms, the thought of losing the money in our savings account (because of the financial collapse lately) began to cause me anxiety. That is when I had to stop and reflect what really had first place in my heart. It was certainly not God, because if it was, I would be obedient to His word when it says “do not be anxious about anything, but with …prayer and supplication let your requests be made known unto God and the peace of God that passes ALL understanding, will guard your hearts and minds in Christ Jesus”. If I have not peace, then God is not first place where He belongs.

Let’s not try to fit God neatly into our lives, and only having faith when things are good; but let’s make God our whole life, bringing Him glory by not having fear in these times, but by having faith, knowing that no matter what happens, our God is still on the throne and our God reigns and one day every knee will bow and every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord!

Some Food for Thought

2008-09-29T15:30:00.002-04:00

Not too long ago, I wrote of a document produced by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops that attempted to provide assistance in helping Roman Catholics vote on issues. I mentioned that the document was esentially spineless (which it is). However, not all Roman Catholics lack vertebral reinforcement. CatholicVote.com has put out a video that should be viewed prayerfully by all Christians. This is an important election coming up, one that has the opportunity to define us for several generations. View this and pray.

http://www.catholicvote.com/cv_homepage_theater_live.swf

Adventures in Atheism, Part 2

2008-09-24T10:59:00.004-04:00

Back in July, I wrote a piece called "Jesus and the Professor." I included the text of an entry that Professor Paul Myers, a biologist at the University of Minnesota - Morris in which he stated his desire to blaspheme the Holy Eucharist, using his massive intellectual powers to coin the elegant and original phrase, "It's just a freakin' cracker."

Someone named Aatish found my column, probably from doing an RSS of any mention of Professor Paul Myers, and suggested that until Christians could prove their point from fact and reason, then we needed essentially shut up and put up with whatever stuff good ol' Professor Myers wanted to say.

After thanking Aatish for his comment, I said that I was more than capable of explaining my position from reason.

However, any argument that I could make on this matter pales compared to a wonderful article by Michael Novak that appeared on today's National Review Online.

By the way, Professor and Aatish (whoever you are), I don't care if you consider this smug or condescending. I'll continue to pray for you both every day. In the event that you are right and I am wrong, and there is no God, then I've just wasted my time. But if I am right and you are wrong, you're going to need all the prayers you can get.

Here's the link to Novak's article.

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MWJiM2NhNTVhYWU2NDhlYjc4MmM4NDczZjJjYmVjZWY=&w=MA==

We could start with you, Baroness!

2008-09-23T22:17:00.003-04:00

Now here's a story you don't see everyday. Baroness Mary Helen Warnock, considered by many to be the premier moralist in England, has said that anyone who is demented has a duty to commit suicide and spare themselves, their families, and - most of all - the national health service the burden and expense of caring for them.

I will agree to this outrageous proposal only if all titled British moralists will lead by example since, at least in this case, there is reason to suspect an advanced dementia.

Here's the link:

http://www.catholic.org/international/international_story.php?id=29538

Well said, Father.

2008-09-23T13:45:00.006-04:00

Father John Roddy is the Rector of Saint Hilda of Whitby Anglican Catholic Church in downtown Atlanta. Father is a wonderful writer who picks up the pen much too infrequently for my taste. When he does write, he says quite a bit worth remembering. (He's also a fine priest and a fine man, but that's the subject of another post.)

Over on Father Roddy's blog, Anglican Catholic Priest (http://anglicancatholicpriest.blogspot.com), he has posted an entry which should be read and seriously considered by most Continuing Anglican churchmen and, indeed, by all Christians of a traditionalist mindset.

Father puts forth the thesis that continuing Anglicans and all traditional Christians may be adversely affected by the Episcopal Church's complete submission to the radical leftist agenda promoted by its leadership and most recently expressed in the illegal deposition of the Right Rev. Robert Duncan from his position as Bishop of Pittsburgh. Father Roddy states that the Episcopal Church will now probably join forces with other leftist causes and seek to inhibit continuing Anglicans through legal battles and through the support of "hate crime" and "hate speech" legislation.

Over on The Continuum, an outstanding traditionalist Anglican blog (http://anglicancontinuum.blogspot.com), one writer responding to Father Roddy used the term "paranoia" in describing Father's perception of the current situation.

I think it is important we remember that not all paranoia is pathological. We need a certain amount of it to survive. Even in situations where paranoia is pathological, never forget the old saying, "Just because you're paranoid, doesn't mean that they are not out to get you!"

I agree with Father Roddy that those of us in the Continuum are at risk for attack from the leftist Episcopal Church and from others of the same ilk. Consider that our freedom of speech and freedom of religion proceed from the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. Since the Bill of Rights was adopted, the freedom of the churches have been guaranteed.

However, in the last few decades, attacks on other freedoms should give us pause. Nowhere is this more apparent than in the current debates surrounding the Second Amendment, the right to keep and bear arms. Historically, that amendment has always guaranteed the citizenry the right to own weapons for whatever legitimate purpose a citizen has in mind. Recently, leftists have attacked this interpretation, claiming that the amendment really means that citizens have the right to form armed militias, much like the National Guard. Earlier this year, the United States Supreme Court upheld the traditional understanding of the Second Amendment. However, it would not take a change of too many justices on the U.S. Supreme Court for that opinion to be overturned and their are many liberal jurists who would be only too happy to do it.

If the Second Amendment could be so easily distorted, what about the First? What would keep a radical court from claiming that freedom of religion does not extend to anything that is described as "hate speech"? What would keep a radical court from saying that any church that holds to doctrine that is "hateful" and proclaims or teaches that doctrine should have their tax-exempt status revoked? Any reasonable person living today would have to answer that nothing would stand in the way of such a position. We already see evidence of this same tactic in the election-year restrictions that are placed on churches. A further example can be found in a recent edition of The International Herald-Tribune in an article described many legal scholars who urged that the First Amendment needed to be modified to take "hate speech" into consideration, much as it is in Canada and Europe. Is it too hard to imagine that could happen here? I think not.

In my opinion, Father Roddy's argument should be read carefully and prayerfully by all. Our freedoms are precious things and while they come to us from God, they are assured by a vigilant citizenry. May God grant us the grace to stay sober and alert, the grace to guard the freedoms that God has given us in our great nation.

Here's the link to Father Roddy's article:

http://anglicancatholicpriest.blogspot.com/2008/09/critique-of-pure-dread.html

I'm Back!!

2008-09-22T10:00:00.002-04:00

I've been so fed up with the upcoming election and its attendant media Obamania that I've been laying low for awhile. Finally, I decided that it was time to come in from the cold and submit another blog entry.

Today, I have a real treat for you. It's an article that appeared on NationalReview.com over the weekend by Bill Whittle. It's entitled The Undefended City and it describes in some detail the factors that frequently go along with the fall of a great society. It's a great article and provides some food for thought in these perilous times.

Here's the link:

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=OGVlY2RhOGM0MWE5MjNmMGM2ZjY0NzcxMjMzMTc5NWI=

Parents, Are You Paying Attention?

2008-08-12T11:47:00.002-04:00

Here's an article from Phyllis Schlafly about the recent meeting of the National Education Association. This is particularly important because these are the people who set the agenda for our public school systems. Read what their plans are and ask yourself, "Is this the agenda I want for my children and grandchildren?"

Here's the link:

http://townhall.com/columnists/PhyllisSchlafly/2008/07/28/the_nea_spells_out_its_policies

Jesus and the Professor, Part 2

2008-08-06T14:19:00.003-04:00

It seems that a young man in London stole a host consecrated at a Roman Catholic High Mass
and placed it in a condom, in protest over the Roman Catholic Church's prohibition on artificial birth control and the alleged problem that teaching has created with AIDs related deaths in Africa.

Now it further seems that the host may have been sent to Dr. Paul Myers, the atheist biology professor whose sacrilegious rant was posted on this website a few weeks ago. According to this story, Dr. Myers pierced the host with a rusty nail, commenting, "I hope that Jesus' tetanus shots are up to date." Dr. Myers then threw the host in the trash.

I've been trying to come up with a comment concerning this story, but its outrageous character, I think, speaks for itself. Pray for these people.

Here's the link to the story from the Catholic Herald:

http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/articles/a0000341.shtml

Prayer in Public Life

2008-08-01T07:25:00.003-04:00

"Quin Hilyer" is not exactly a household name but it should be. Quin is an editor for the Washington Examiner and writes a regular column for Spectator.org, the internet arm of The American Spectator. I also consider Quin a personal friend.

Yesterday, Quin published a great column on prayer and those who live in the public eye, particularly politicians. It's not only worth a read, it's worth several.

Here's the link:

http://spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=13622

Spineless Bishops Strike Again

2008-07-31T10:39:00.003-04:00

There's an old joke that goes something like this: When a new bishop is elected, he immediately undergoes surgery to remove his spine and tatoo a yellow streak up his back.

Well, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops have once again proved the truth of that statement. The bishops have released a document entitled "Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship." In this document they encourage Catholics to not be "single-issue" voters, i.e., a politician's stance on abortion should not necessarily be the sole determinant of how a person votes.

OK, I guess agree with that as soon as the boys in purple answer another question: If an elected official can deny something as basic as the right to life to our most vulnerable people, the unborn, what other rights can they deny? What other rights are even important? It's time for Christians to put first things first and stand up to defend life! Nothing else is more important.

One of the advantages of being in the Anglican Catholic Church is that we are, for the most part, a poor church. Because of this, our bishops can't afford the surgical procedures noted above.

Here's the link from nj.com

http://www.nj.com/printer/printer.ssf?/base/news-4/1217390961251120.xml=&coll=5

Here's the link to the bishops' document:

http://www.usccb.org/faithfulcitizenship/FCStatement.pdf

Maybe we should sue God?

2008-07-22T22:41:00.004-04:00

Here's one from the good folks at Stoplight. A man in Michigan is suing two Christian publishing houses for $70,000,000. His complaint: The Bible contains passages that offend him.

http://www.citizenlink.org/Stoplight/A000007807.cfm

One More Reason Why I Am an Anglican Catholic

2008-07-22T19:57:00.003-04:00

I could rail on about the travesty of modern liturgy and the loss of the sense of the sacred. I could speak endless words about how the Church of Rome, indeed almost all contemporary churches, have abandoned their ancient and timeless liturgical principles. I could say all of these things, but I think the video below, filmed at World Youth Day 2008, says it better than I ever could:

http://www.gloria.tv/?video=arbjp2rmxsioabwnmvyn

Are You Excited About the Election?? Yawn!

2008-07-16T07:20:00.002-04:00

Four more months to go and I'm bored to tears with the upcoming election. I'm scared that Campaign 2012 will begin immediately after Election Day.

Do you feel this way, too? Then you'll be glad to know that the folks at jibjab.com have come up with a new election video that will brighten your spirits. These are the same folks that gave us the great Kerry-Bush, "This Land Is Your Land" video in 2004.

Folks at the New Yorker take note: This is how you do satire. Here's the link:

http://sendables.jibjab.com/sendables/1191/time_for_some_campaignin

Jesus and the Professor

2008-07-11T06:52:00.004-04:00

Paul Zachary Myers is not exactly a household name, or wasn't until now. In what is a clear sign of our times, this biology professor at the University of Minnesota - Morris has recently stepped outside of his area of expertise to comment on the Holy Eucharist. Writing on his blog, Pharyngula: Evolution, development, and random biological ejaculations from a godless liberal, he addressed the situation where a young man smuggled the Sacred Body of Christ out of a Roman Catholic church and kept it for four days. Myers' reaction was amazing, even for an atheist academic. He proposed to have someone mail him a consecrated host so that it could be publicly desecrated.

I'm going to copy his entire post here so that you can read it in full. I warn you up front that this contains language that you will never normally encounter on my blog. However, controversial posts like his have a way of being pulled under some pressure and I'd like to make sure that a record of this post is enshrined somewhere.

How should we deal with this blasphemy as Christians? While it is easy for us to be angry, even outraged, I think it is important to recognize Myers' screed as the output of a sick soul and to pray for him as would our Lord, "Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do."

Here's the post and here's the link:

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/07/its_a_goddamned_cracker.php

-----

T'S A FRACKIN’ CRACKER!

Category: Religion • Stupidity
Posted on: July 8, 2008 8:05 PM, by PZ Myers

There are days when it is agony to read the news, because people are so goddamned stupid. Petty and stupid. Hateful and stupid. Just plain stupid. And nothing makes them stupider than religion.

Here's a story that will destroy your hopes for a reasonable humanity.

Webster Cook says he smuggled a Eucharist, a small bread wafer that to Catholics symbolic of the Body of Christ after a priest blesses it, out of mass, didn't eat it as he was supposed to do, but instead walked with it.

This isn't the stupid part yet. He walked off with a cracker that was put in his mouth, and people in the church fought with him to get it back. It is just a cracker!

Catholics worldwide became furious.

Would you believe this isn't hyperbole? People around the world are actually extremely angry about this — Webster Cook has been sent death threats over his cracker. Those are just kooks, you might say, but here is the considered, measured response of the local diocese:

"We don't know 100% what Mr. Cooks motivation was," said Susan Fani a spokesperson with the local Catholic diocese. "However, if anything were to qualify as a hate crime, to us this seems like this might be it."

We just expect the University to take this seriously," she added "To send a message to not just Mr. Cook but the whole community that this kind of really complete sacrilege will not be tolerated."

Wait, what? Holding a cracker hostage is now a hate crime? The murder of Matthew Shephard was a hate crime. The murder of James Byrd Jr. was a hate crime. This is a goddamned cracker. Can you possibly diminish the abuse of real human beings any further?

Well, you could have a priest compare this event to a kidnapping.

"It is hurtful," said Father Migeul Gonzalez with the Diocese. "Imagine if they kidnapped somebody and you make a plea for that individual to please return that loved one to the family."
Gonzalez said the Diocese is willing to meet with Cook and help him understand the importance of the Eucharist in hopes of him returning it. The Diocese is dispatching a nun to UCF's campus to oversee the next mass, protect the Eucharist and in hopes Cook will return it.

I like the idea of sending a scary nun to guard the ceremony at the next mass. But even better…let's send Webster Cook to hell!

Gonzalez said intentionally abusing the Eucharist is classified as a mortal sin in the Catholic church, the most severe possible. If it's not returned, the community of faith will have to ask for forgiveness.
"We have to make acts of reparation," Gonzalez said. "The whole community is going to turn to prayer. We'll ask the Lord for pardon, forgiveness, peace, not only for the whole community affected by it, but also for [Cook], we offer prayers for him as well."

Get some perspective, man. IT'S A CRACKER.

And of course, Bill Donohue is outraged (I know, Donohue is going to die of apoplexy someday when a gnat violates his oatmeal, so this isn't saying much).

For a student to disrupt Mass by taking the Body of Christ hostage--regardless of the alleged nature of his grievance--is beyond hate speech. That is why the UCF administration needs to act swiftly and decisively in seeing that justice is done. All options should be on the table, including expulsion.

Oh, beyond hate speech. Where does this fit on the Shoah scale, Bill? It shouldn't even register, but here is Wild-Eyed Bill the Offended calling for the expulsion of a student…for not swallowing a cracker.

Would you believe that the mealy-mouthed president of the university, John Hitt, is avoiding defending his student is instead playing up the importance of the Catholic church to the university? Of course you would. That's what university presidents do. Bugger the students, keep the donors and the state reps happy.

Unfortunately, Webster Cook has now returned the cracker. Why?

Webster just wants all of this to go away. Especially now that he feels his life is in danger.

That's right. Crazy Christian fanatics right here in our own country have been threatening to kill a young man over a cracker. This is insane. These people are demented fuckwits. And Cook is not out of the fire yet — that Fox News story ends with an open incitement to cause him further misery.

University officials said, that as for right now, Webster Cook is not in trouble. If anyone or any group wants to file a formal complaint with the University through the student judicial system, they can. If that happens, Webster will go through a hearing either in front of an administrative panel or a panel of his peers.

Got that? If you don't like what Webster Cook did, all you have to do is complain to the university, and they will do the dirty work for you of making his college experience miserable. And don't assume the university would support Cook; the college is now having armed university police officers standing guard during mass.

I find this all utterly unbelievable. It's like Dark Age superstition and malice, all thriving with the endorsement of secular institutions here in 21st century America. It is a culture of deluded lunatics calling the shots and making human beings dance to their mythical bunkum.

So, what to do. I have an idea. Can anyone out there score me some consecrated communion wafers? There's no way I can personally get them — my local churches have stakes prepared for me, I'm sure — but if any of you would be willing to do what it takes to get me some, or even one, and mail it to me, I'll show you sacrilege, gladly, and with much fanfare. I won't be tempted to hold it hostage (no, not even if I have a choice between returning the Eucharist and watching Bill Donohue kick the pope in the balls, which would apparently be a more humane act than desecrating a goddamned cracker), but will instead treat it with profound disrespect and heinous cracker abuse, all photographed and presented here on the web. I shall do so joyfully and with laughter in my heart. If you can smuggle some out from under the armed guards and grim nuns hovering over your local communion ceremony, just write to me and I'll send you my home address.

Just wait. Now there'll be a team of Jesuits assigned to rifle through my mail every day.

Sliding Down the Slippery Slope

2008-07-08T07:06:00.002-04:00

I'm often asked by continuing Anglicans, "Why don't we seek unity with Canterbury?" The short, correct, and undiplomatic answer, of course, is that Canterbury is in heresy and we cannot seek union with heretics. Yesterday, we saw the final insult as the Church of England Synod voted to "consecrate" women to the episcopate. Not surprisingly, the liberals of the Synod refused to allow for any provision for those who oppose the move to receive pastoral support from sympathetic bishops, much in the same way that the Episcopal Church did a cram-down on those who opposed women "bishops" in the United States.

Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, allegedly hung his head when support for traditionalists was denied, the implication being that he was somehow sorry that the church had failed to support traditionalists. I find this surprising, considering that Williams has supported the "ordination" of women for years. More than likely, he was just tired.

Many traditionalists are already jabbering about swimming the Tiber to Rome. If results in the United States suggest anything, a few will do so, a few will join a continuing church (such as the ACC), and most will simply draw a new line in the sand. In short, for the most part, nothing will change.

Ruth Gledhill of the Times of London covered the story. Here's her report:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article4289994.ece

On other fronts, the Global Anglican Future Conference, or GAFCON, met in Jerusalem from June 22nd through June 29th. This conference of Evangelical Anglican primates, bishops, and others, formed mainly to protest the consecration of open homosexuals to the episcopate and homosexual marriage. GAFCON does not address other serious differences between traditional Anglicans and the modernist ones, such as the "ordination" of women, the role of Tradition and Scripture in the Church, to name two. Unless these are addressed, it is only a matter of time before even these evangelicals struggle with the same issues as plague Canterbury.

Archbishop Mark Haverland of the ACC has written a cogent and accurate assessment of GAFCON. Here's the link:

http://www.anglicancatholic.org/gafcon.html

DOMA and the Candidate

2008-06-18T18:06:00.002-04:00

Back in the days when the homosexual marriage movement was getting under way, many people in the U.S. realized that gay marriages performed in one state would have to be recognized in other states because of the Privileges and Immunities Clause in the U.S. Constitution. Congress responded to this potential problem by passing the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) in 1996, stating that no state had to recognize a same sex union of another state and that the Federal government would not recognize these relationships.

Ever wonder what a political candidate might think about this issue? Check the link below:

http://www.citizenlink.org/turnsignal/A000007636.cfm

I Now Pronounce You Adam and Steve

2008-06-17T07:38:00.003-04:00

Here's an article from National Review Online concerning the marriage crisis that we face because of the decision from the California Supreme Court that stated that restricting marriage to a man and a woman violated the California State Constitution. Christians need to be very aware that everything that we believe is under assault. I would say more but this article says it all. Here's the link:

http://article.nationalreview.com/print/?q=ZGNmODNiMjI0MTQ1MTQwNGM4N2YyNmVhY2UyZTE0OWY=

Why I Have Little Respect for Professional Athletes

2008-06-15T21:41:00.003-04:00

I spent the better part of this Father's Day evening glued to my television watching the U.S. Open. Tiger Woods, playing in tremendous pain in his left knee at the beginning of the round, almost miraculously appeared to get better as the day wore on. Tiger, as usual, threw clubs during his round, muttered his usual curse words after missing a shot, in short, behaved as a petulant child. After making a 15 foot putt to force a playoff, God's gift to golf had the following exchange with Roger Maltbie of NBC Sports:

Maltbie: Now, I have to ask you about the knee. It seemed like it bothered you early on and then it seemed like it didn't bother you as much as the round progressed, different from other days. True or not true?
Woods: Uh, true. Um, took some things to kind of relieve that.
Maltbie: And adrenaline, maybe?
Woods: [smiling] That helps, too.

OK, Tiger, what did you take? If it was 800 to 1000 mg of ibuprofen that's one thing. However, if the "things" that he took included a substance such as hydrocodone, isn't that something else entirely?

Also, what about all of the children who look up to Tiger as a role model? They now know that the means justify the ends. It's OK to take whatever you need to in order to achieve your goal.

Finally, the gentleman's game of golf has been reduced to the ash heap that is professional athletics.

Do you think the major sports outlets will cover this or demand an explanation? Not a chance. Tiger will never have to answer one question. But the children will remember!

I guess there is no professional sport left that values honor and integrity over results.

When Does Free Speech Become Hate Speech?

2008-06-12T13:53:00.004-04:00

In yesterday's edition of the International Herald Tribune there was an article that should send shivers up the spine of any Christian. Entitled "Hate speech or free speech? What much of West bans is protected in U.S." The article can be neatly summed up in the title. What is alarming is the number of legal scholars and politicians who believe that the First Amendment privileges should be tightened to exclude items that have been designated as "hate speech." Here's the problem: Who decides what crosses the line into hate speech? For a Christian, is it hate speech to preach that Christ is the only way to salvation? Is it hate speech to attempt to convert people of other religions? Is it hate speech to insist that human sexual activity is only moral when it exists within the context of holy matrimony, that is in a Sacramental relationship between one man and one woman?

When we start to restrict what people can and cannot say (slander and libel excepted), then we simply reach a point where we are arbitrarily setting standards. My intuition tells me that traditional Christians will be negatively impacted by this more than any other group. It is a sad sign of the progression of liberalism in our society that a thesis proposing that we should limit the first amendment could even see the light of day.

Oh, yes, here's one more thing: Let's say that somewhere down the line the Free Speech clause is encumbered with hate-speech provisions. What's next? What if someone starts to think that there are other aspects of the First Amendment that should be curtailed? Freedom of religion, perhaps? What will stop someone from saying that this religion is OK, but that religion teaches intolerant doctrine? Who will be there to stop them once Free Speech has been relativized?

Be very, very concerned.

Here's the link:

http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/06/11/america/hate.php

Oh, oh, oh, It's Magic!

2008-06-11T19:17:00.004-04:00

Here's a shot of our first greyhound, Golden Magic, taken when she was two years old and just adopted. Magic is now nine and going strong. She's also my favorite, but just by a nose! Visit

http://www.greyhoundadoption.org/ to find out more about these greyt dogs.

Some Thoughts on Unalienable Rights I

2008-06-02T07:55:00.000-04:00

Recently I was packing some books to take from my home to my office at the church and I came across a small volume that could easily fit in a shirt pocket. It was paper bound and had images of the American flag on the front. This small volume contained the Declaration of Independence, the United States Constitution, and the Bill of Rights. I sat down in a corner of my basement and proceeded to read, "IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776. The Unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America."

I've always been very proud to be born a citizen of this great nation. When I think of all the people throughout the world who have made tremendous sacrifices to come here, I'm filled with awe at their courage, dedication, and belief that the United States of America held opportunities for them that far exceeded their own country of origin. These are people who would take their life savings to cross the Atlantic Ocean in the bowels of a steamship. Ellis Island will forever stand as a monument to the stubborn determination of several generations of new Americans. Other Americans came differently, fleeing communism or other despotic regimes, even floating across the Straits of Florida through shark-infested water on nothing more than boards and only the glimmer of hope that they would reach the United States where they could enjoy the freedom about which they could only dream in their native lands. When I think of these brave people, I can only cry out my thanks to God that I could be born into such a great nation, that I was spared the grueling and dangerous journey to this great land.

I sat reading the Declaration, the Constitution, and Bill of Rights, and I thought of all the people who made such sacrifices so that I could enjoy the freedom and opportunity that is the birthright of all Americans. I thought of my maternal great-grandfather who fought for the Union in the Civil War and later became a physician in his native east Tennessee. I thought of those on my father's side of the family whose blood fertilized the ground and stained the Confederate gray of their uniforms in battles far, far from home. I thought of my grandfather who landed on Normandy on D-Day plus two and my father who served in the Italian Occupation Forces. I remember with great thanks the service of my uncle, my mother's brother, Uncle Roy, whose plane was shot down somewhere in Europe and who was, as the War Department put it in a telegram to my grandparents, "missing and presumed dead." But he wasn't dead. He was in a German POW camp, one that was - fortunately for him and us - liberated by the Americans as they swept through Europe in 1944. These people and countless others who are nameless and faceless sacrificed their time, their safety, their occupations, and - in too many cases - their lives, so that I could enjoy the freedom that is found in the United States. As I read through this little book, I couldn't help but be humbled by the men and women who are, even as I write this, sacrificing their lives in strange and terrible lands named Iraq and Afghanistan for the principles in the little book that I held in my hands.

As I read my little book, I was struck by a passage in the Declaration of Independence, a passage that I, and I suppose all of us, have heard so many times before:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

On the surface it seems pretty simple now, we have rights that come from God, rights that are ours by the mere fact of our birth, rights that can never under any circumstances be taken away from us, and that among them are the rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

What seems simple now, however, was wildly radical in its day. The world of the 18th Century was a world that saw "rights" as something that proceeded from the authority of the state. In Europe, this frequently meant rights that were granted to the people by a monarch who ruled by God's will and with God's authority. However, those whose thoughts would frame the Declaration would have none of this. For them, the rights that were ascribed to man were a part of the very fabric of his nature and could no more be given to him by someone else than Joe could give Jim property that belonged to Steve. The Revolution that would be fought up and down the Atlantic seaboard actually had its first shot fired, not at Concord, but in these powerful words: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

As I was meditating on these words, I suddenly realized that I wanted to take some time over the coming months and share some thoughts with you about these rights: The rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. I don't wish to present myself as an expert on this period, because I am neither a political scientist, nor am I a historian. What I am, however, is an Anglican Catholic Priest by vocation and a clinical psychologist by profession who approaches his task with a basic presupposition: I believe that a fundamentally sound understanding of these rights can only be achieved if one understands the Christian principles that are, I believe, implicit in them. Over the coming months, I plan to write a few occasional pieces on the right to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." These will not be scholarly. They will, however, be the thoughts and meditations of a man who has been called by God to serve at His Altar in the one nation on earth that protects his freedom to do so. While I hope that you will find some enjoyment in what I write, I pen these words primarily to offer my thanks to God who has placed me in this wonderful country for His service.

More to come...

Name That Trinity!!

2008-05-30T08:01:00.003-04:00

I saw this on Virtue Online this morning and just had to share it with you.

Is the Camel Coming into the Tent?

2008-05-27T16:07:00.002-04:00

Many in the pro-life movement have claimed for years that when abortion is legal, it would be the first step toward a total disregard for human life. This argument has been poo-poo'd by the pro-abortion folks, but the creeping reality of euthanasia is making its presence felt in most of the west including the United States. Most pro-life folks believe that if you can terminate life at one end of the spectrum, it's only a matter of time before you can terminate on the other.

Here's an article that appeared this morning on Townhall.com that will enlighten you on the nature of the pro-death movement that hides its desire for death behind such euphemisms as "pro-choice" and "quality of life."

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/KenConnor/2008/05/26/encouraging_death

Invoking the Name of God

2008-05-20T17:51:00.002-04:00

Actually this post has nothing to do with theology. It could also be titled, "Why airline pilots make the big bucks." I think anyone on any of these planes would have called out to God on any of these landings.

Here's the link:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=4RdxU-0W-RE

Water, Water Everywhere!!!

2008-05-19T23:45:00.003-04:00

Recently, the folks over at Stoplight produced a new short on H2O. Now, what can be more harmless and noncontroversial than water? By the way, Stuart Shepard seems to confuse Helium and Hydrogen, but don't worry about it. Just check out the link below.

http://www.citizenlink.org/Stoplight/A000007448.cfm

Where Catholic Liberals Go to Die!

2008-05-14T15:57:00.005-04:00

One of the most hideously liberal organizations that had its birth in the morass of post-Vatican II Christianity is the "Call to Action" movement. To the best of my knowledge the "Call to Action" crowd never accomplished much of anything other than to question any teaching that Catholics or, for that matter, most Christians hold dear.

Now many of them are aging and not particularly gracefully. Here's a closing liturgy from the Southern California chapter of "Call to Action" that I think pretty fairly summarizes the whole movement. Sadly, there are many Episcopalians who might witness this "liturgy" and decide that this should become normative for them.

The link follows. However, I wouldn't suggest watching this right after a meal.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NSbiL3XduvY

Now, if that's not enough, here's a "Mass" celebrated by Roman Catholic womenpriests(yes, that's the name of the organization). This "Mass" was also celebrated at "Call to Action".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SfKSfJ9cLwY

More Poems? You Must Be Kidding?

2008-05-09T06:56:00.005-04:00

No, I'm not kidding. For some reason that I don't quite understand, I'm feeling compelled to post some of my favorite poems, all of which are in the public domain.

Jekyll Island is one of Georgia's Golden Isles, along with St. Simon's Island, Sea Island, Colonel's Island, and Cumberland Island. Jekyll is nine miles long and - at most - half a mile wide, separated from Brunswick, the closest town, by a 12-mile causeway that cuts through the "Marshes of Glynn." My grandmother was the second person to move to Jekyll Island when it first opened as a state park in the late 1950s and my sisters and I would spend the bulk of our summers there.

Probably no place on earth is as beautiful to me as the marshlands of Glynn County, Georgia. Sidney Lanier seemed to feel the same way. Here's one of his greatest works, "The Marshes of Glynn."

---

The Marshes of Glynn
by Sidney Lanier

Glooms of the live-oaks, beautiful-braided and woven
With intricate shades of the vines that myriad-cloven
Clamber the forks of the multiform boughs,—
Emerald twilights,—
Virginal shy lights,
Wrought of the leaves to allure to the whisper of vows,
When lovers pace timidly down through the green colonnades
Of the dim sweet woods, of the dear dark woods,
Of the heavenly woods and glades,
That run to the radiant marginal sand-beach within
The wide sea-marshes of Glynn;—

Beautiful glooms, soft dusks in the noonday fire,—
Wildwood privacies, closets of lone desire,
Chamber from chamber parted with wavering arras of leaves,—
Cells for the passionate pleasure of prayer to the soul that grieves,
Pure with a sense of the passing of saints through the wood,
Cool for the dutiful weighing of ill with good;—

O braided dusks of the oak and woven shades of the vine,
While the riotous noonday sun of the June-day long did shine
Ye held me fast in your heart and I held you fast in mine;
But now when the noon is no more, and riot is rest,
And the sun is a-wait at the ponderous gate of the West,
And the slant yellow beam down the wood-aisle doth seem
Like a lane into heaven that leads from a dream,—
Ay, now, when my soul all day hath drunken the soul of the oak,
And my heart is at ease from men, and the wearisome sound of the stroke
Of the scythe of time and trowel of trade is low,
And belief overmasters doubt, and I know that I know,
And my spirit is grown to a lordly great compass within,
That the length and the breadth and the sweep of the marshes of Glynn
Will work me no fear like the fear they have wrought me of yore
When length was fatigue, and when breadth was but bitterness sore,
And when terror and shrinking and dreary unnamable pain
Drew over me out of the merciless miles of the plain,—

Oh, now, unafraid, I am fain to face
The vast sweet visage of space.
To the edge of the wood I am drawn, I am drawn,
Where the gray beach glimmering runs, as a belt of the dawn,
For a mete and a mark
To the forest dark:—
So:
Affable live-oak, leaning low,—
Thus—with your favor—soft, with a reverent hand,
(Not lightly touching your person, Lord of the land!)
Bending your beauty aside, with a step I stand
On the firm-packed sand,
Free
By a world of marsh that borders a world of sea.
Sinuous southward and sinuous northward the shimmering band
Of the sand-beach fastens the fringe of the marsh to the folds of the land.
Inward and outward to northward and southward the beach-lines linger and curl
As a silver-wrought garment that clings to and follows the firm sweet limbs of a girl.
Vanishing, swerving, evermore curving again into sight,
Softly the sand-beach wavers away to a dim gray looping of light.
And what if behind me to westward the wall of the woods stands high?
The world lies east: how ample, the marsh and the sea and the sky!
A league and a league of marsh-grass, waist-high, broad in the blade,
Green, and all of a height, and unflecked with a light or a shade,
Stretch leisurely off, in a pleasant plain,
To the terminal blue of the main.

Oh, what is abroad in the marsh and the terminal sea?
Somehow my soul seems suddenly free
From the weighing of fate and the sad discussion of sin,
By the length and the breadth and the sweep of the marshes of Glynn.

Ye marshes, how candid and simple and nothing-withholding and free
Ye publish yourselves to the sky and offer yourselves to the sea!
Tolerant plains, that suffer the sea and the rains and the sun,
Ye spread and span like the catholic man who hath mightily won
God out of knowledge and good out of infinite pain
And sight out of blindness and purity out of a stain.

As the marsh-hen secretly builds on the watery sod,
Behold I will build me a nest on the greatness of God:
I will fly in the greatness of God as the marsh-hen flies
In the freedom that fills all the space 'twixt the marsh and the skies:
By so many roots as the marsh-grass sends in the sod
I will heartily lay me a-hold on the greatness of God:
Oh, like to the greatness of God is the greatness within
The range of the marshes, the liberal marshes of Glynn.

And the sea lends large, as the marsh: lo, out of his plenty the sea
Pours fast: full soon the time of the flood tide must be:
Look how the grace of the sea doth go
About and about through the intricate channels that flow
Here and there,
Everywhere,
Till his waters have flooded the uttermost creeks and the low-lying lanes,
And the marsh is meshed with a million veins,
That like as with rosy and silvery essences flow
In the rose-and-silver evening glow.
Farewell, my lord Sun!
The creeks overflow: a thousand rivulets run
'Twixt the roots of the sod; the blades of the marsh-grass stir;
Passeth a hurrying sound of wings that westward whirr;
Passeth, and all is still; and the currents cease to run;
And the sea and the marsh are one.

How still the plains of the waters be!
The tide is in his ecstasy;
The tide is at his highest height;
And it is night.

And now from the Vast of the Lord will the waters of sleep
Roll in on the souls of men,
But who will reveal to our waking ken
The forms that swim and the shapes that creep
Under the waters of sleep?
And I would I could know what swimmeth below when the tide comes in
On the length and the breadth of the marvellous marshes of Glynn.

More for the Good of the Service

2008-05-09T06:47:00.002-04:00

Here's another short piece from Robert W. Service. Perhaps this is a good response to modern critics:

--

I have no doubt at all the Devil grins,
As seas of ink I spatter.
Ye Gods, forgive my "literary" sins -
The other kind don't matter.

Cremation Question and Answer

2008-05-07T11:05:00.004-04:00

Recently, an interested person asked me about the teaching of the Anglican Catholic Church on cremation. After I explained that we were not opposed to cremation provided that ashes were not scattered, I began thinking about the practice of burning our dead.

I suppose my mind wandered a little too far because my attention was drawn to one of my favorite poets, Robert W. Service. Yes, I know that for poetry connoisseurs, Service is considered too banal to be taken seriously, but I love his writing. Yes, I know that as an English major I should have a more sophisticated literary taste, but I don't.

So, here for you cremation junkies is, what I think, is one of the greatest poems ever written.

----

The Cremation of Sam McGee

by Robert W. Service

There are strange things done in the midnight sun
By the men who moil for gold;
The Arctic trails have their secret tales
That would make your blood run cold;
The Northern Lights have seen queer sights,
But the queerest they ever did see
Was that night on the marge of Lake Lebarge
I cremated Sam McGee.

Now Sam McGee was from Tennessee, where the cotton blooms and blows.
Why he left his home in the South to roam ‘round the Pole, God only knows.
He was always cold, but the land of gold seemed to hold him like a spell;
Though he’d often say in his homely way that “he’d sooner live in hell.”

On a Christmas Day we were mushing our way over the Dawson trail.
Talk of your cold! through the parka’s fold it stabbed like a driven nail.
If our eyes we’d close, then the lashes froze till sometimes we couldn’t see;
It wasn’t much fun, but the only one to whimper was Sam McGee.

And that very night, as we lay packed tight in our robes beneath the snow,
And the dogs were fed, and the stars o’erhead were dancing heel and toe,
He turned to me, and “Cap,” says he, “I’ll cash in this trip, I guess;
And if I do, I’m asking that you won’t refuse my last request.”

Well, he seemed so low that I couldn’t say no; then he says with a sort of moan:
“It’s the cursed cold, and it’s got right hold till I’m chilled clean through to the bone.
Yet ‘taint being dead—it’s my awful dread of the icy grave that pains;
So I want you to swear that, foul or fair, you’ll cremate my last remains.”

A pal’s last need is a thing to heed, so I swore I would not fail;
And we started on at the streak of dawn; but God! he looked ghastly pale.
He crouched on the sleigh, and he raved all day of his home in Tennessee;
And before nightfall a corpse was all that was left of Sam McGee.

There wasn’t a breath in that land of death, and I hurried, horror-driven,
With a corpse half hid that I couldn’t get rid, because of a promise given;
It was lashed to the sleigh, and it seemed to say: “You may tax your brawn and brains,
But you promised true, and it’s up to you to cremate those last remains.”

Now a promise made is a debt unpaid, and the trail has its own stern code.
In the days to come, though my lips were dumb, in my heart how I cursed that load.
In the long, long night, by the lone firelight, while the huskies, round in a ring,
Howled out their woes to the homeless snows—O God! how I loathed the thing.

And every day that quiet clay seemed to heavy and heavier grow;
And on I went, though the dogs were spent and the grub was getting low;
The trail was bad, and I felt half mad, but I swore I would not give in;
And I’d often sing to the hateful thing, and it hearkened with a grin.

Till I came to the marge of Lake Lebarge, and a derelict there lay;
It was jammed in the ice, but I saw in a trice it was called the “Alice May.”
And I looked at it, and I thought a bit, and I looked at my frozen chum;
Then “Here,” said I, with a sudden cry, “is my cre-ma-tor-eum.”

Some planks I tore from the cabin floor, and I lit the boiler fire;
Some coal I found that was lying around, and I heaped the fuel higher;
The flames just soared and the furnace roared—such a blaze you seldom see;
Then I burrowed a hole in the glowing coal, and I stuffed in Sam McGee.

Then I made a hike, for I didn’t like to hear him sizzle so;
And the heavens scowled, and the huskies howled, and the wind began to blow.
It was icy cold, but the hot sweat rolled down my cheeks, and I don’t know why;
And the greasy smoke in an inky cloak went streaking down the sky.

I do not know how long in the snow I wrestled with grisly fear;
But the stars came out and they danced about ere again I ventured near;
I was sick with dread, but I bravely said: “I’ll just take a peep inside.
I guess he’s cooked, and it’s time I looked;” . . . then the door I opened wide.

And there sat Sam, looking cool and calm, in the heart of the furnace roar;
And he wore a smile you could see a mile, and he said: “Please close that door.
It’s fine in here, but I greatly fear you’ll let in the cold and storm—
Since I left Plumtree, down in Tennessee, it’s the first time I’ve been warm.”

Politics as usual? I hope not.

2008-05-06T22:12:00.003-04:00

I try to avoid political discourse on this blog (or at least party specific discourse), however I think that most people would not be surprised to know that I'm a pretty conservative fellow. I follow a lot of the blogs, I listen to Rush and Mark Levin, I own most of William F. Buckley, Jr's writings, and I've been a National Review subscriber since I was in my teens.

Now having said all this, let me tell you what is bothering me. Most conservatives (which are mostly Republicans) seem to be convinced that the way to win the November election is to spend most of their time and energy on describing what horrible people their opponents are. In the past few weeks, I've received gobs of e-mails talking about Barack Obama: He's a Muslim, he's not a real Christian, he's a follower of Saul Alinsky, he's a pro-abort, he eats live kittens for breakfast (OK, I made the last one up). I've further received loads of e-mails about Hillary Clinton: She's corrupt, her husband's a serial adulterer (what a surprise), she's a closet communist, she eats live puppies for breakfast (especially since Barack has the kittens). Much the same stuff is being said in some quarters even about John McCain. All of this stuff might be true or it might not. As I see it, the problem is that I don't care if any of it is true and I don't think the majority of the American people do either.

I'll go one step further. I believe that if conservatives think that they can win seats in the House and Senate, or even the White House by simply highlighting their opponents' inadequacies or outright dangerous or stupid views, then conservatives will be huge losers and they will deserve to be.

This country faces tremendous challenges and these challenges will require solutions that are founded in clear, understandable, common-sense policies that are consistent with the foundational principles of our nation. Most Americans can understand that and that, dear reader, is what will win or lose elections. It's easy to call any candidate a name and, even if the name is accurate, nobody cares. What is going to make a difference in 2008 is a calm, measured discussion of the issues that face our nation as we come to the close of the first decade of this new millennium.

I believe that the reason the Republican party is in shambles is because they have gotten fat and lazy, particularly regarding the principles that brought the party to the forefront in the mid-1990s. The party won with a "Contract with America" that promised term limits, fiscal responsibility, lower taxation, and such. In each one of these areas, save taxation, Republicans took their eyes off the ball, becoming enamored with the "inside the beltway" life. It wasn't just that they spent like drunken sailors, it was that they seemed cavalierly out of touch with the needs and problems of the American people, responding only, "But your taxes are lower!!"

I'm not saying raise taxes, God knows I'm not saying that. But what I am saying is: Let's have a conversation about issues and give poor Jeremiah Wright a rest. After all, that guy and those who follow him deserve our pity and prayers, not our rage. Let's talk about the sanctity of human life from conception until natural death. Let's really talk about the problem of what to do with our borders and with the millions of people that have come here illegally. Let's talk about the defense of our nation against Islamic terrorism. Let's talk about our economic standing vis a vis the global economy. Let's talk about how we will solve any one of these or any other issue. But, for God's sake, let's just once see a conservative who will spend his time articulating a positive vision for America, one that secures and holds dear the right of all Americans to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." I believe that Americans will support a positive issues-driven campaign in which a candidate clearly states what he or she is FOR. I believe that most Americans (and I) will tend to reject, or at most be lackluster toward a campaign that says, "Vote for me because my opponent is a schmuck."

OK, I've said my piece. Now I will go back to writing about the stuff that interests me. Thanks for putting up with my rant and I'll try not to do it again. At least for the next four years...

Ecological Religion, Part II

2008-04-24T14:20:00.002-04:00

Here's a great link from American Thinker on one of the craziest things in the environmental movement: Imagine the world without people! In the eyes of most environmentalists, we are nothing more than a virus on the face of the earth.

Here's the link:

http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/04/earth_first_people_later.html

PS: Why do committed Darwinists work so diligently to protect endangered species?