Folks,
This morning I was on distribution of an e-mail sent by one of the dear ladies at a local Catholic Church where I routinely attend Mass. The title of this e-mail was (of course) "Will This Surprise You". It concerned an article from the Gallup Poll web site entitled Catholics Similar to Mainstream on Abortion, Stem Cells. Apparently, according to this poll, there is no significant difference between the viewpoints of non-Catholics and Catholics when it comes to abortion and embryonic stem cell research. These sad statistics are replicated in areas such as divorce, extra-marital children, and homosexual relations. The lady who sent this e-mail asked what the USCCB will have to say about this report. She also stated that the report is a frightening one, and indeed it is.
I am unsure what I can add to this kind lady's observations, but it is painfully clear that we the laity fail to pay heed when the Church speaks. 1st Timothy 3:15 points out quite clearly that the Church is the pillar and foundation of truth:
"But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth."
2nd Thessalonians 2:15 goes on to state:
"Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle."
Yet we Catholics ignore our Holy Fathers and think that we have a right to a vote on what we should do morally. We fail to recognize that Jesus Christ came to establish a Kingdom, NOT a Democracy, that Jesus Christ is the King of kings and Lord of lords, and the Pope (our Holy Father) is His vicar here on Earth. So when the Pope issues encyclicals such as Humanae Vitae and Dignitas Personae, we as Catholics must read, study and adhere to what he says.
Sadly, however, people often want the license to do what they choose to do without the consequences. Our post-modern society has indoctrinated us with the idea that if something feels good, then it must be good, and we ought to have the freedom to do it as we choose without suffering from adverse consequences in the process. Hence we have rampant adultery and fornication, the biggest causes of unwanted pregnancy. Indeed, one may argue that to really reduce the abortion rate effectively, we as a nation have to return to old fashion holiness and stop committing adultery, stop fornicating. God gave us brains and He expects us to use them. We are not wild animals, given to the passion of the moment and instinct without self-control. If we don't want a baby, then we must refrain from sexual intercourse. Yes, I believe in the "right to choose", and that choice comes before sexual intercourse, never afterwards.
I am also dismayed at the idea that unborn babies may be experimented upon in order to devise ways to keep the born alive. In our selfish desire to live ever longer and more prosperously in this life, we willingly sacrifice the lives of the unborn. What has happened to our concept of self-sacrifice? Have we forgotten what St. Paul wrote in Romans 12:1?
"I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service."
St. Paul never wrote that we are to sacrifice the lives of our unborn babies!
Furthermore, the very people who demand that you and I sacrifice our tax monies for the government bailouts of the non-producers whom they support are the very ones who with no compunction whatsoever leap at the chance to sacrifice a human embryo so that they might live just one more day longer, please. It is high time that we see Truth for who He is. One day each of us will stand before the Judgment Seat of Jesus Christ when the sheep will be divided from the goats as Matthew 25:31-46 relates. As 1st Corinthians 6:9-10 states:
"Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God."
We who style ourselves as devout Catholics need to pray for our elected leaders, including President Obama, Vice President Biden, House Speaker Pelosi and all the rest. We need to pray for our Supreme Court Justices John Roberts, Samuel Alito and the rest. We need to pray for our Bishops and our Priests. And we need to embrace holiness before the Lord. As 1st Peter 1:13-16 states:
"Wherefore gird up the loins of your mind, be sober, and hope to the end for the grace that is to be brought unto you at the revelation of Jesus Christ; As obedient children, not fashioning yourselves according to the former lusts in your ignorance: But as he which hath called you is holy, so be ye holy in all manner of conversation; Because it is written, Be ye holy; for I am holy."
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
Monday, March 30, 2009
The Tyranny of Liberalism
I encourage everyone to read and study the following interview between the Zenit News Agency and James Kalb on the Tyranny of Liberalism. Just click on the underlined link to view the article.
True Charity
From time to time I have the opportunity to attend a local Pentecostal church in the area where I live. Having been raised in a Pentecostal denomination prior to my conversion into Catholicism, I have a soft spot in my heart for all things Pentecostal. Frankly, I’ve become quite attached to the people of this small community. Oh yes, the church services are a bit emotional and loud for me, but the parishioners demonstrate a real zeal and enthusiasm for the Gospel which we Catholics would do well to emulate. Furthermore, with a little patience and open mindedness on our part, we Catholics just might find out that we have more in common with these Christian people than the doctrinal issues, which separate us. It is a sad commentary that Christianity has fractured into over 30,000 different denominations instead of being one as Christ commanded us.
However, this little aside isn’t the point of this blog entry. Rather, this entry is a follow-up to yesterday’s entry on the False Gospel of Social Justice. Of course, having attended Mass the previous evening, I went to Sunday School class at this local Pentecostal church on the following day. The instructor – a wonderfully blessed lady of God – had the students perform a skit on the story of the Samaritan woman at the well, and on the Good Samaritan who rescued the man fallen into the ditch. The story of the Samaritan women at the well may be read in John 4:1-42, and the story of the Good Samaritan may be read at Luke 10:25-37. The focus of this blog entry is on the latter story, that of the Good Samaritan.
A lawyer stood up, and wishing to test Jesus, asked what he had to do to inherit eternal life. Jesus responded that he had to love God with all his heart, and love his neighbor as himself. The lawyer (being of course a lawyer) wanted to justify himself before Jesus. So he asked who his neighbor was. Jesus responded with the story of the good Samaritan. In this story a man on the road between Jerusalem and Jericho had been beset by bandits, and left injured in a ditch. On passing by him, neither priest nor Levite would help the injured man. But an outcast of Jewish society – a Samaritan – did help the injured man. How like that are the things of today! Do “officials in fine hats” truly ever help the injured, or is it the outcasts who from the mercy of their hearts do the real helping? Indeed, one may argue as the instructor pointed out to her students that the man in the ditch was more than likely a Jewish priest or Levite himself travelling the road between Jerusalem and Jericho, since Jericho is where many priestly people lived, and Jerusalem where the temple of worship was located. This injured man’s own people would not help him, but a man regarded as the refuse of society did.
Then the instructor went on to relate what had happened to her over the weekend as she was with her five-year old nephew. This little boy asked his aunt that they walk over to the nearby house of a neighbor who was confined to a wheel chair and bring him a pie. The neighbor was ostensibly a man of some financial means himself, but essentially was alone. So the instructor and her nephew visited the man and brought him a pie. At that time the man’s son was visiting also, and took the instructor aside to thank her for being such a wonderful neighbor.
Notice that no coercion from government, no amount of taxation, no redistribution of wealth from those who produce to those who don’t, could have possibly equaled the charity shown by the instructor’s five-year old nephew. This is the social justice to which we are all called as Christians, as members of the Body of Christ. Government can never take care of people, and government must never be trusted to take care of people. That is our job, which we must do as St. Paul described in Romans 12:1, “I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service.”
Just as Jesus sacrificed all for us, so must we sacrifice. The purpose isn’t to fill bellies with pie, but to bring Jesus to the lost, the lonely, the least. Sometimes the only Jesus someone will ever see is the Jesus whom we show in our lives (which the instructor emphatically pointed out to her students).
However, this little aside isn’t the point of this blog entry. Rather, this entry is a follow-up to yesterday’s entry on the False Gospel of Social Justice. Of course, having attended Mass the previous evening, I went to Sunday School class at this local Pentecostal church on the following day. The instructor – a wonderfully blessed lady of God – had the students perform a skit on the story of the Samaritan woman at the well, and on the Good Samaritan who rescued the man fallen into the ditch. The story of the Samaritan women at the well may be read in John 4:1-42, and the story of the Good Samaritan may be read at Luke 10:25-37. The focus of this blog entry is on the latter story, that of the Good Samaritan.
A lawyer stood up, and wishing to test Jesus, asked what he had to do to inherit eternal life. Jesus responded that he had to love God with all his heart, and love his neighbor as himself. The lawyer (being of course a lawyer) wanted to justify himself before Jesus. So he asked who his neighbor was. Jesus responded with the story of the good Samaritan. In this story a man on the road between Jerusalem and Jericho had been beset by bandits, and left injured in a ditch. On passing by him, neither priest nor Levite would help the injured man. But an outcast of Jewish society – a Samaritan – did help the injured man. How like that are the things of today! Do “officials in fine hats” truly ever help the injured, or is it the outcasts who from the mercy of their hearts do the real helping? Indeed, one may argue as the instructor pointed out to her students that the man in the ditch was more than likely a Jewish priest or Levite himself travelling the road between Jerusalem and Jericho, since Jericho is where many priestly people lived, and Jerusalem where the temple of worship was located. This injured man’s own people would not help him, but a man regarded as the refuse of society did.
Then the instructor went on to relate what had happened to her over the weekend as she was with her five-year old nephew. This little boy asked his aunt that they walk over to the nearby house of a neighbor who was confined to a wheel chair and bring him a pie. The neighbor was ostensibly a man of some financial means himself, but essentially was alone. So the instructor and her nephew visited the man and brought him a pie. At that time the man’s son was visiting also, and took the instructor aside to thank her for being such a wonderful neighbor.
Notice that no coercion from government, no amount of taxation, no redistribution of wealth from those who produce to those who don’t, could have possibly equaled the charity shown by the instructor’s five-year old nephew. This is the social justice to which we are all called as Christians, as members of the Body of Christ. Government can never take care of people, and government must never be trusted to take care of people. That is our job, which we must do as St. Paul described in Romans 12:1, “I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service.”
Just as Jesus sacrificed all for us, so must we sacrifice. The purpose isn’t to fill bellies with pie, but to bring Jesus to the lost, the lonely, the least. Sometimes the only Jesus someone will ever see is the Jesus whom we show in our lives (which the instructor emphatically pointed out to her students).
More on Social Justice
Dear Folks,
There have been many commentaries issued on last year’s Presidential election where a majority of Roman Catholics voted for abortionists as President and Vice-President. Many of these Catholics thought that they were justified because of a perception that the Democrat Party has a platform, which purports to best serve the cause of social justice and the common good. Sadly, while Republican Party may be little better, this perception is in error. The discussion below (parts of which I wrote previously) explains why, though I suspect most readers will know this. Sadly, there are some Catholics who have insisted that they will select whom they want as political leaders (instead of doing what Jesus wants). This is the same cry of the Israelites in 1st Samuel 8:5:
Now that you are old, and your sons do not follow your example, appoint a king over us, as other nations have, to judge us
So the children of Israel got King Saul as their leader, and we have gotten abortionists as ours.
Now something should be said with regard to social justice and the common good. As was explained in the first blog post here at Commentarius de Pronosticis, in Matthew 25:31-46, Jesus tells us how the nations of the world will at the end of time be divided into sheep and goats. The sheep are the ones who fed the hungry, gave drink to the thirsty, clothed the naked, cared for the sick, welcomed the alien and visited the imprisoned. The goats did not. We know the fate of both. Sadly, the majority of Catholics have misinterpreted this passage of Sacred Scripture to mean that “nanny” government must provide welfare and social service functions at the expense of those who pay taxes without realizing that Christ gave this injunction to His disciples, NOT to Caesar. Indeed, every time we the members of the Body of Christ – His Church – surrender to Caesar our God-given duty to feed the hungry, give drink to the thirsty, clothe the naked, care for the sick, welcome the alien and visit the imprisoned, then we enable Caesar to deny us the individual right to life which is EXACTLY what is happening with unborn children. A government that can give us everything we want is a government that will take everything we have away. The ONLY legitimate function government has is the common defense – the prevention of the initiation of force against the citizens. Each citizen is responsible for his or her own self, and the consequences of his or her own actions or inactions. Expecting “nanny” government to bail us out of a bad situation only makes us dependent on the largess from the public treasury. Living off the resources of those who work to produce wealth while not working ourselves is exactly the opposite of what St. Paul commanded in 2nd Thessalonians 3:10:
In fact, when we were with you, we instructed you that if anyone was unwilling to work, neither should that one eat.
Government’s job is NOT to redistribute wealth from those who earn to those who do not; rather, each individual who has wealth must voluntarily give up his wealth in service to the poor, the disenfranchised, the sick, the needy. Is that not what Jesus said to the rich man in Matthew 19:21?
Jesus said to him, "If you wish to be perfect, go, sell what you have and give to (the) poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me."
Jesus NEVER said that government was supposed to take away the rich man’s wealth. Giving must ALWAYS be voluntary. Moral action such as this cannot be legislated from the halls of Congress or mandated from the bench of the Supreme Court. It must be preached from the pulpit and come from a loving, voluntary service each one of us gives to God and country. That is the message that we must give. For example, misappropriating (i.e., stealing) from the middle class wage earner to give money to an inner city drug addict who will use that money to continue in his addiction is always wrong. Repentance comes BEFORE restoration to health, NEVER afterwards. How does that verse of Scripture in Matthew 6:33 go?
But seek first the kingdom (of God) and his righteousness, and all these things will be given you besides.
If there is no repentance, then there can be no social justice. The Gospel is one of Jesus Christ, NOT one of merely social justice. The Cross is composed of a horizontal beam of our voluntary service to and love for our neighbors, and a vertical beam of our voluntary service to and love of God. Indeed, Jesus Himself pointed out in Mark 14:7:
The poor you will always have with you, and whenever you wish you can do good to them, but you will not always have me.
Now knowing these things, how can any of us trust any political party which promises that it will serve the common good and social justice when its very platform advocates infanticide? The affirmation of Democrat Party’s support of murder is stated clearly on < *.pdf > page 50 or electronic page 52 at the following web link which will give the entire official platform for the 2008 Presidential election season:
DNC National Platform
One brief excerpt suffices:
The Democratic Party strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade and a woman’s right to choose a safe and legal abortion, regardless of ability to pay, and we oppose any and all efforts to weaken or undermine that right.
As we all realize, murder is NOT a right! At the risk of writing to the choir, so to speak, choice comes BEFORE engaging in sexual intercourse. God didn’t make us wild animals given solely to our passions. He expects us to use our brains. Thus, to say that one is a pro-life Democrat is oxymoronic – as oxymoronic perhaps as some say the term “pro-life Republican” is. We have to be Catholics loyal to the Magisterium of the Church, NOT members of a political party. Otherwise, we repeat the mistake of the children of Israel in 1st Samuel Chapter 8 where the “peepul” complained about Prophet Samuel’s corrupt sons and cried for a King. Notice what the Lord God said to Samuel in verse 7:
Grant the people's every request. It is not you they reject, they are rejecting me as their king
The majority of us Roman Catholics have done that very thing by voting FOR the pro-abortionists. For those of us who disliked the policies of John McCain and Sarah Palin, did we educate ourselves and think to vote for an acceptable third party candidate as a write-in on the ballot, or did we do the expedient thing and default to the Democrat Party because we were too lazy to do any research, or too prideful in the “rightness” (or should I say “leftness”) of our choices?
Now of course the Republican Party is hardly exempt from failing to live by Judeo-Christian principles. The initiation of force in Iraq is morally indefensible; yes, President Bush had a choice to either take a risk that Saddam Hussein did NOT have WMD, or to engage in a pre-emptive strike and be wrong in his assessment of WMD in Iraq. But the initiation of force, no matter what the threat, is always immoral. Yes, the torture and indefinite detention of prisoners in the Guantanamo Bay Prison are morally reprehensible; so is the beheading of innocent civilians by the Islamic fascists being detained. And yes, we can argue that President Bush and the Republicans in Congress have not done enough to end abortion. BUT it is the Catholic Democrats in Congress (Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi, Ted Kennedy, Patrick Kennedy, Dennis Kucinich, Pat Leahy, John Kerry, etc.) who are openly “pro-choice”, who opposed Bush's appointment of pro-life Justices Samuel Alito and John Roberts to the SCOTUS, and who voted to give the President the power to invade Iraq. Indeed, one might well argue that far more blood is on the hands of Nancy Pelosi (a prominent Catholic defiant of her Bishop!) than on George Bush.
All promises to stop the war in Iraq and to help the poor and hungry and sick and unemployed mean NOTHING when we murder our very own unborn babies to the tune of up to 1.5 million per year (which is more than 2 babies every single minute - far more murdered every day than have been killed in Iraq in 4 years). Indeed, hundreds have been put to the sword in the time it took me to write this. Regardless of the distaste that some readers will have for the Republicans, John McCain of the Republican Party or Chuck Baldwin of the Constitution Party would have appointed Justices to the US Supreme Court who would have overturned Roe v Wade and stopped infanticide. Barack Obama will continue in a practice that we thought extinct when the Roman praetors put Caligula out of their misery. He will sign the Freedom of Choice Act that will allow unlimited abortion at any time and place, and he will fund embryonic stem cell research using tax-payer money. Judah was carried off into captivity for lesser crimes than these! The Prophet Habakkuk asked why God used a nation more evil than Judah – Babylon – to do this. God said that it was the only way to bring the children of Israel to their knees. What will it take for us to get on our knees and beg forgiveness?
Everything written above can be summed up by 2nd Chronicles 7:14:
And if my people, upon whom my name has been pronounced, humble themselves and pray, and seek my presence and turn from their evil ways, I will hear them from heaven and pardon their sins and revive their land.
There will be NO social justice, NO common good until we STOP aborting our babies. It’s that simple. The principles of the individual right to life and the non-initiation of force must always be sacrosanct or we as a Republic shall surely fall.
There have been many commentaries issued on last year’s Presidential election where a majority of Roman Catholics voted for abortionists as President and Vice-President. Many of these Catholics thought that they were justified because of a perception that the Democrat Party has a platform, which purports to best serve the cause of social justice and the common good. Sadly, while Republican Party may be little better, this perception is in error. The discussion below (parts of which I wrote previously) explains why, though I suspect most readers will know this. Sadly, there are some Catholics who have insisted that they will select whom they want as political leaders (instead of doing what Jesus wants). This is the same cry of the Israelites in 1st Samuel 8:5:
Now that you are old, and your sons do not follow your example, appoint a king over us, as other nations have, to judge us
So the children of Israel got King Saul as their leader, and we have gotten abortionists as ours.
Now something should be said with regard to social justice and the common good. As was explained in the first blog post here at Commentarius de Pronosticis, in Matthew 25:31-46, Jesus tells us how the nations of the world will at the end of time be divided into sheep and goats. The sheep are the ones who fed the hungry, gave drink to the thirsty, clothed the naked, cared for the sick, welcomed the alien and visited the imprisoned. The goats did not. We know the fate of both. Sadly, the majority of Catholics have misinterpreted this passage of Sacred Scripture to mean that “nanny” government must provide welfare and social service functions at the expense of those who pay taxes without realizing that Christ gave this injunction to His disciples, NOT to Caesar. Indeed, every time we the members of the Body of Christ – His Church – surrender to Caesar our God-given duty to feed the hungry, give drink to the thirsty, clothe the naked, care for the sick, welcome the alien and visit the imprisoned, then we enable Caesar to deny us the individual right to life which is EXACTLY what is happening with unborn children. A government that can give us everything we want is a government that will take everything we have away. The ONLY legitimate function government has is the common defense – the prevention of the initiation of force against the citizens. Each citizen is responsible for his or her own self, and the consequences of his or her own actions or inactions. Expecting “nanny” government to bail us out of a bad situation only makes us dependent on the largess from the public treasury. Living off the resources of those who work to produce wealth while not working ourselves is exactly the opposite of what St. Paul commanded in 2nd Thessalonians 3:10:
In fact, when we were with you, we instructed you that if anyone was unwilling to work, neither should that one eat.
Government’s job is NOT to redistribute wealth from those who earn to those who do not; rather, each individual who has wealth must voluntarily give up his wealth in service to the poor, the disenfranchised, the sick, the needy. Is that not what Jesus said to the rich man in Matthew 19:21?
Jesus said to him, "If you wish to be perfect, go, sell what you have and give to (the) poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me."
Jesus NEVER said that government was supposed to take away the rich man’s wealth. Giving must ALWAYS be voluntary. Moral action such as this cannot be legislated from the halls of Congress or mandated from the bench of the Supreme Court. It must be preached from the pulpit and come from a loving, voluntary service each one of us gives to God and country. That is the message that we must give. For example, misappropriating (i.e., stealing) from the middle class wage earner to give money to an inner city drug addict who will use that money to continue in his addiction is always wrong. Repentance comes BEFORE restoration to health, NEVER afterwards. How does that verse of Scripture in Matthew 6:33 go?
But seek first the kingdom (of God) and his righteousness, and all these things will be given you besides.
If there is no repentance, then there can be no social justice. The Gospel is one of Jesus Christ, NOT one of merely social justice. The Cross is composed of a horizontal beam of our voluntary service to and love for our neighbors, and a vertical beam of our voluntary service to and love of God. Indeed, Jesus Himself pointed out in Mark 14:7:
The poor you will always have with you, and whenever you wish you can do good to them, but you will not always have me.
Now knowing these things, how can any of us trust any political party which promises that it will serve the common good and social justice when its very platform advocates infanticide? The affirmation of Democrat Party’s support of murder is stated clearly on < *.pdf > page 50 or electronic page 52 at the following web link which will give the entire official platform for the 2008 Presidential election season:
DNC National Platform
One brief excerpt suffices:
The Democratic Party strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade and a woman’s right to choose a safe and legal abortion, regardless of ability to pay, and we oppose any and all efforts to weaken or undermine that right.
As we all realize, murder is NOT a right! At the risk of writing to the choir, so to speak, choice comes BEFORE engaging in sexual intercourse. God didn’t make us wild animals given solely to our passions. He expects us to use our brains. Thus, to say that one is a pro-life Democrat is oxymoronic – as oxymoronic perhaps as some say the term “pro-life Republican” is. We have to be Catholics loyal to the Magisterium of the Church, NOT members of a political party. Otherwise, we repeat the mistake of the children of Israel in 1st Samuel Chapter 8 where the “peepul” complained about Prophet Samuel’s corrupt sons and cried for a King. Notice what the Lord God said to Samuel in verse 7:
Grant the people's every request. It is not you they reject, they are rejecting me as their king
The majority of us Roman Catholics have done that very thing by voting FOR the pro-abortionists. For those of us who disliked the policies of John McCain and Sarah Palin, did we educate ourselves and think to vote for an acceptable third party candidate as a write-in on the ballot, or did we do the expedient thing and default to the Democrat Party because we were too lazy to do any research, or too prideful in the “rightness” (or should I say “leftness”) of our choices?
Now of course the Republican Party is hardly exempt from failing to live by Judeo-Christian principles. The initiation of force in Iraq is morally indefensible; yes, President Bush had a choice to either take a risk that Saddam Hussein did NOT have WMD, or to engage in a pre-emptive strike and be wrong in his assessment of WMD in Iraq. But the initiation of force, no matter what the threat, is always immoral. Yes, the torture and indefinite detention of prisoners in the Guantanamo Bay Prison are morally reprehensible; so is the beheading of innocent civilians by the Islamic fascists being detained. And yes, we can argue that President Bush and the Republicans in Congress have not done enough to end abortion. BUT it is the Catholic Democrats in Congress (Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi, Ted Kennedy, Patrick Kennedy, Dennis Kucinich, Pat Leahy, John Kerry, etc.) who are openly “pro-choice”, who opposed Bush's appointment of pro-life Justices Samuel Alito and John Roberts to the SCOTUS, and who voted to give the President the power to invade Iraq. Indeed, one might well argue that far more blood is on the hands of Nancy Pelosi (a prominent Catholic defiant of her Bishop!) than on George Bush.
All promises to stop the war in Iraq and to help the poor and hungry and sick and unemployed mean NOTHING when we murder our very own unborn babies to the tune of up to 1.5 million per year (which is more than 2 babies every single minute - far more murdered every day than have been killed in Iraq in 4 years). Indeed, hundreds have been put to the sword in the time it took me to write this. Regardless of the distaste that some readers will have for the Republicans, John McCain of the Republican Party or Chuck Baldwin of the Constitution Party would have appointed Justices to the US Supreme Court who would have overturned Roe v Wade and stopped infanticide. Barack Obama will continue in a practice that we thought extinct when the Roman praetors put Caligula out of their misery. He will sign the Freedom of Choice Act that will allow unlimited abortion at any time and place, and he will fund embryonic stem cell research using tax-payer money. Judah was carried off into captivity for lesser crimes than these! The Prophet Habakkuk asked why God used a nation more evil than Judah – Babylon – to do this. God said that it was the only way to bring the children of Israel to their knees. What will it take for us to get on our knees and beg forgiveness?
Everything written above can be summed up by 2nd Chronicles 7:14:
And if my people, upon whom my name has been pronounced, humble themselves and pray, and seek my presence and turn from their evil ways, I will hear them from heaven and pardon their sins and revive their land.
There will be NO social justice, NO common good until we STOP aborting our babies. It’s that simple. The principles of the individual right to life and the non-initiation of force must always be sacrosanct or we as a Republic shall surely fall.
Sunday, March 29, 2009
The False Gospel of Social Justice
At 10:00 pm last evening (03/28/2009) I had the opportunity to listen to one of Father John Corapi’s famous sermons. This particular one was on Matthew 25:31-46, the Parable of the Sheep and the Goats. As the reader may recall, when the Son of Man comes in His glory to judge the nations, He will divide the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. The sheep he will put on His right hand and the goats on His left. The sheep are those who fed Him when He was hungry, gave Him drink when He was thirsty, welcomed Him when He was a stranger, clothed Him when He was naked, cared for Him when he was sick, and visited Him when He was imprisoned. The goats are those who failed to do those things. Of course, the sheep ask the Lord when they fed Him, gave Him drink, welcomed Him, clothed Him, cared for Him and visited Him. The Lord responds by saying that when they did such actions to the least, they did those actions to Him. Likewise, when the goats failed to do those actions to the least, that is when they failed the Lord. The sheep of course are welcomed into the Kingdom of His Father and the goats into eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.
Father Corapi stressed in his sermon that we must see Jesus in the least, the lost and the lonely. He explained that often we do not see Jesus in the drug addict, the alcoholic, the homeless bum, the prostitute because all we see are their wounds. Yet it is in their wounds that Jesus suffers, and when we act as sheep instead of goats, then we begin to see Jesus in others.
The important point that went unmentioned, however, is this. Jesus was telling His disciples these things. If the reader goes back to the beginning of Matthew 24, the reader will observe that as Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives, His disciples came to Him privately and asked Him what would be the sign of His coming. Jesus then begins a discourse with His disciples, which lasts through the end of Matthew 25. Jesus was telling His disciples that they must be the sheep. Never in any of this did Jesus designate Caesar (a euphemism that I shall use for government) as the one responsible to feed the hungry, give drink to the thirsty, welcome the stranger, clothe the naked, care for the sick or visit the imprisoned. Rather, this duty belongs to Christ’s disciples. Indeed, one may argue that every time we the members of the Body of Christ surrender to Caesar our God-given duty to feed the hungry, give drink to the thirsty, welcome the stranger, clothe the naked, care for the sick or visit the imprisoned, then we surrender our freedom in Christ and enable Caesar to have the power of life and death over us. We can never surrender our God-given duty to help the least, the lost and the lonely to Caesar. Every time we do, we lose a very real measure of liberty, and Caesar never ends up helping the least, the lost and the lonely anyways. He and his politicians invariably pocket the money from the public purse for their own greedy aims without regard for the common good and social justice.
There is another story that bears meaning upon this. It is the story of the rich young ruler in Luke 18:8-30 who came to Jesus asking what he must do to inherit eternal life. Jesus told him to keep the commandments. The man responded that he had done so all his life. Jesus, in hearing this, explained to him that he still lacked one thing: he had to go and sell all that he owned and give the money to the poor. Then and only then would he have treasure in heaven. Of course the man went away very sad, for he was very rich and unwilling to follow Jesus in this manner.
Now notice in this story not once did Jesus tell the disciples to confiscate the rich man’s belongings and redistribute his wealth to the poor. Not once did Jesus say that Caesar must tax the rich man and give the tax revenue away to the poor. Rather, Jesus said that the rich man had to make a voluntary commitment to Him. The rich man had to sacrifice voluntarily and willingly, without the coercion of either physical force or unjust laws of excessive taxation. I suspect in all of this that it was not feeding the poor that was paramount; rather, what was paramount was saving this rich man’s soul. The goal of the Gospel is never full bellies, but saved souls. That is the point when Jesus said that it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than a rich man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven. Jesus loved the rich man, NOT for what the rich man could do for the poor, BUT for the fact that he was a man created in the image and likeness of God.
Too many sometimes even well-meaning religious people become so enamored with the gospel of social justice and the common good that they believe that the goal of Christianity is have Caesar feed the hungry, give drink to the thirsty, welcome the stranger, clothe the naked, care for the sick and visit the imprisoned. To them, the end goal is prosperity for all in this life. But that is NOT why Jesus came into the world. Jesus came to save souls. As Jesus said to Judas Iscariot in John 12:8, “For the poor always ye have with you; but me ye have not always.”
Our service to the poor must always be a voluntary and willing sacrifice to Christ, one that we can never surrender to Caesar. One may argue that our nation is in such a sad state because we as Christians do NOT heed St. Paul’s admonition in Romans 12:1: “I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service.”
This sacrifice is a service we do to save souls, not to fill bellies. Jesus makes this very clear in what He tells the crowd who followed Him from the feeding of the 5000 to Capernaum in John 6:26-27, “Jesus answered them and said, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Ye seek me, not because ye saw the miracles, but because ye did eat of the loaves, and were filled. Labour not for the meat which perisheth, but for that meat which endureth unto everlasting life, which the Son of man shall give unto you: for him hath God the Father sealed.”
The Good News is the Gospel of Jesus Christ, NOT the gospel of social justice.
Father Corapi stressed in his sermon that we must see Jesus in the least, the lost and the lonely. He explained that often we do not see Jesus in the drug addict, the alcoholic, the homeless bum, the prostitute because all we see are their wounds. Yet it is in their wounds that Jesus suffers, and when we act as sheep instead of goats, then we begin to see Jesus in others.
The important point that went unmentioned, however, is this. Jesus was telling His disciples these things. If the reader goes back to the beginning of Matthew 24, the reader will observe that as Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives, His disciples came to Him privately and asked Him what would be the sign of His coming. Jesus then begins a discourse with His disciples, which lasts through the end of Matthew 25. Jesus was telling His disciples that they must be the sheep. Never in any of this did Jesus designate Caesar (a euphemism that I shall use for government) as the one responsible to feed the hungry, give drink to the thirsty, welcome the stranger, clothe the naked, care for the sick or visit the imprisoned. Rather, this duty belongs to Christ’s disciples. Indeed, one may argue that every time we the members of the Body of Christ surrender to Caesar our God-given duty to feed the hungry, give drink to the thirsty, welcome the stranger, clothe the naked, care for the sick or visit the imprisoned, then we surrender our freedom in Christ and enable Caesar to have the power of life and death over us. We can never surrender our God-given duty to help the least, the lost and the lonely to Caesar. Every time we do, we lose a very real measure of liberty, and Caesar never ends up helping the least, the lost and the lonely anyways. He and his politicians invariably pocket the money from the public purse for their own greedy aims without regard for the common good and social justice.
There is another story that bears meaning upon this. It is the story of the rich young ruler in Luke 18:8-30 who came to Jesus asking what he must do to inherit eternal life. Jesus told him to keep the commandments. The man responded that he had done so all his life. Jesus, in hearing this, explained to him that he still lacked one thing: he had to go and sell all that he owned and give the money to the poor. Then and only then would he have treasure in heaven. Of course the man went away very sad, for he was very rich and unwilling to follow Jesus in this manner.
Now notice in this story not once did Jesus tell the disciples to confiscate the rich man’s belongings and redistribute his wealth to the poor. Not once did Jesus say that Caesar must tax the rich man and give the tax revenue away to the poor. Rather, Jesus said that the rich man had to make a voluntary commitment to Him. The rich man had to sacrifice voluntarily and willingly, without the coercion of either physical force or unjust laws of excessive taxation. I suspect in all of this that it was not feeding the poor that was paramount; rather, what was paramount was saving this rich man’s soul. The goal of the Gospel is never full bellies, but saved souls. That is the point when Jesus said that it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than a rich man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven. Jesus loved the rich man, NOT for what the rich man could do for the poor, BUT for the fact that he was a man created in the image and likeness of God.
Too many sometimes even well-meaning religious people become so enamored with the gospel of social justice and the common good that they believe that the goal of Christianity is have Caesar feed the hungry, give drink to the thirsty, welcome the stranger, clothe the naked, care for the sick and visit the imprisoned. To them, the end goal is prosperity for all in this life. But that is NOT why Jesus came into the world. Jesus came to save souls. As Jesus said to Judas Iscariot in John 12:8, “For the poor always ye have with you; but me ye have not always.”
Our service to the poor must always be a voluntary and willing sacrifice to Christ, one that we can never surrender to Caesar. One may argue that our nation is in such a sad state because we as Christians do NOT heed St. Paul’s admonition in Romans 12:1: “I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service.”
This sacrifice is a service we do to save souls, not to fill bellies. Jesus makes this very clear in what He tells the crowd who followed Him from the feeding of the 5000 to Capernaum in John 6:26-27, “Jesus answered them and said, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Ye seek me, not because ye saw the miracles, but because ye did eat of the loaves, and were filled. Labour not for the meat which perisheth, but for that meat which endureth unto everlasting life, which the Son of man shall give unto you: for him hath God the Father sealed.”
The Good News is the Gospel of Jesus Christ, NOT the gospel of social justice.
Saturday, March 28, 2009
Our Judas Iscariots and the Gospel of Social Justice
From time to time I have the opportunity to teach an apologetics class at one of the local churches where I reside. At one of these sessions the students and I had a great discussion on the beginnings of Judas Iscariot’s eventual betrayal of Jesus Christ. The discussion involved Judas objecting to the anointing of Jesus feet with oil in John chapter 12, and on Jesus' discourse about His being the Bread of Life in John 6. The write-up below explains their relationship.
The reader may remember that just before the discourse on the Bread of Life, Jesus had fed the 5000 from a young boy's loaves and fishes which He had miraculously multiplied. Then that evening Jesus went up into the mountain to pray and the disciples crossed the Lake of Galilee by boat. Jesus met them part way by walking on water, after which the boat arrived at land. Then Jesus and the disciples went onto Capernaum where Jesus spoke at the synagogue.
The crowd that had been fed awoke the next morning, and found Jesus and His disciples gone, so they followed in boats to Capernaum. When they arrived, Jesus confronted them by saying that the only reason they followed was the food He had provided - their bellies were full. He said that they should eat of the eternal Bread of Life, not the manna that perishes, and they responded by asking for this Bread. Jesus of course told them that He is the Bread, that His Flesh and His Blood is given for us. As the reader may recall, few could accept this and departed hence. Jesus then asked the Twelve if they too would depart and Peter said no because Jesus had the words of eternal life, so to whom could they go? At the end, Jesus asked if He had not selected twelve, but that one would betray Him. Perhaps this is when Judas Iscariot became disgusted with the idea of Jesus giving His Flesh and Blood. We may wonder if Jesus couldn't sense this disgust on Judas' part, hence His declaration about His coming betrayal. Indeed, Judas was enamored with the feeding of the 5000, but revolted at Jesus offering His very own self.
Now in John chapter 12 Judas objects to Jesus being anointed with costly oil, stating that the money spent on the oil could have been given to the poor instead. Yes, Judas was completely enamored by the "gospel of social justice", that is to say, the feeding of the 5000. But when it came time to share in Christ's death, he was revolted. To him the gospel was all about social justice and nothing about eternal justice. Indeed, the Last Supper was the final straw for Judas, for he couldn't stand the idea of "eating" Jesus' flesh and "drinking" Jesus' body - he wanted Jesus to feed the poor and become a king by social acclamation, by democracy. But that wasn't Jesus' way.
Jesus came to establish the Kingdom of God, NOT the democracy of man. Jesus would eventually show by His death that democracy is inherently immoral, being nothing but two wolves and one sheep voting on what’s for dinner, or in Jesus’ case, the rabble rousing majority crying in Pontius Pilate’s courtyard, “Crucifige Eum, crucifige Eum” (Latin for Crucify Him, crucify Him).
So this whole discussion reminded all of us in class about our liberal theologians and our liberal politicians who substitute the Gospel of Jesus Christ for the false gospel of social justice, meeting the desires of the majority at the expense of the individual right to life. Why did “the people” follow Jesus across the Lake of Galilee? Because Jesus filled their bellies, NOT because Jesus IS eternal life. They (“the people”) had NO intention of following Jesus Himself; they only wanted another handout. And it is the same way today. “The people” want bellies filled with manna that decays, not souls filled with Jesus' Body and Blood which never decays away.
And why did Judas object to Jesus' anointing? Because (he said) the money could have been spent on the poor. In the same way we have Judas Iscariots (our liberal politicians and theologians) who promote this in their betrayal of Christ. They object to a personal sacrifice (on their part) that is required to spiritually share in Christ's Body and Blood ("unless you eat My Body and drink My Blood, you have no life in you"). They object to giving one's tithes and offerings to God as Mary (Martha's sister) did when she anointed Jesus' feet. And they claim as Judas did that the poor would be better served by NOT doing these things. That is the SAME cry of our politicians - Obama, Biden, Pelosi, etc., who take out 3 trillion dollars of debt to be repaid by our grandchildren. Nothing has changed in 2000 years. We do not remember the past, so we constantly repeat it. We modern people want prosperity BEFORE repentance (and will borrow accordingly to get it), and once we get prosperity - like the crowd of 5000 that was fed the loaves and fishes - we have no intentions of repentance. The individual right to life becomes superseded by what the plebeians can vote for themselves out of the public purse. We follow only when we get what we want. One day God will say, "Enough".
“Repent, for the Kingdom of God is at hand.”
The reader may remember that just before the discourse on the Bread of Life, Jesus had fed the 5000 from a young boy's loaves and fishes which He had miraculously multiplied. Then that evening Jesus went up into the mountain to pray and the disciples crossed the Lake of Galilee by boat. Jesus met them part way by walking on water, after which the boat arrived at land. Then Jesus and the disciples went onto Capernaum where Jesus spoke at the synagogue.
The crowd that had been fed awoke the next morning, and found Jesus and His disciples gone, so they followed in boats to Capernaum. When they arrived, Jesus confronted them by saying that the only reason they followed was the food He had provided - their bellies were full. He said that they should eat of the eternal Bread of Life, not the manna that perishes, and they responded by asking for this Bread. Jesus of course told them that He is the Bread, that His Flesh and His Blood is given for us. As the reader may recall, few could accept this and departed hence. Jesus then asked the Twelve if they too would depart and Peter said no because Jesus had the words of eternal life, so to whom could they go? At the end, Jesus asked if He had not selected twelve, but that one would betray Him. Perhaps this is when Judas Iscariot became disgusted with the idea of Jesus giving His Flesh and Blood. We may wonder if Jesus couldn't sense this disgust on Judas' part, hence His declaration about His coming betrayal. Indeed, Judas was enamored with the feeding of the 5000, but revolted at Jesus offering His very own self.
Now in John chapter 12 Judas objects to Jesus being anointed with costly oil, stating that the money spent on the oil could have been given to the poor instead. Yes, Judas was completely enamored by the "gospel of social justice", that is to say, the feeding of the 5000. But when it came time to share in Christ's death, he was revolted. To him the gospel was all about social justice and nothing about eternal justice. Indeed, the Last Supper was the final straw for Judas, for he couldn't stand the idea of "eating" Jesus' flesh and "drinking" Jesus' body - he wanted Jesus to feed the poor and become a king by social acclamation, by democracy. But that wasn't Jesus' way.
Jesus came to establish the Kingdom of God, NOT the democracy of man. Jesus would eventually show by His death that democracy is inherently immoral, being nothing but two wolves and one sheep voting on what’s for dinner, or in Jesus’ case, the rabble rousing majority crying in Pontius Pilate’s courtyard, “Crucifige Eum, crucifige Eum” (Latin for Crucify Him, crucify Him).
So this whole discussion reminded all of us in class about our liberal theologians and our liberal politicians who substitute the Gospel of Jesus Christ for the false gospel of social justice, meeting the desires of the majority at the expense of the individual right to life. Why did “the people” follow Jesus across the Lake of Galilee? Because Jesus filled their bellies, NOT because Jesus IS eternal life. They (“the people”) had NO intention of following Jesus Himself; they only wanted another handout. And it is the same way today. “The people” want bellies filled with manna that decays, not souls filled with Jesus' Body and Blood which never decays away.
And why did Judas object to Jesus' anointing? Because (he said) the money could have been spent on the poor. In the same way we have Judas Iscariots (our liberal politicians and theologians) who promote this in their betrayal of Christ. They object to a personal sacrifice (on their part) that is required to spiritually share in Christ's Body and Blood ("unless you eat My Body and drink My Blood, you have no life in you"). They object to giving one's tithes and offerings to God as Mary (Martha's sister) did when she anointed Jesus' feet. And they claim as Judas did that the poor would be better served by NOT doing these things. That is the SAME cry of our politicians - Obama, Biden, Pelosi, etc., who take out 3 trillion dollars of debt to be repaid by our grandchildren. Nothing has changed in 2000 years. We do not remember the past, so we constantly repeat it. We modern people want prosperity BEFORE repentance (and will borrow accordingly to get it), and once we get prosperity - like the crowd of 5000 that was fed the loaves and fishes - we have no intentions of repentance. The individual right to life becomes superseded by what the plebeians can vote for themselves out of the public purse. We follow only when we get what we want. One day God will say, "Enough".
“Repent, for the Kingdom of God is at hand.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
