Today's Humor

Folks,

I got this little bit of humor from one of my Pentecostal friends at work. Enjoy!

Little Zachary was doing very badly in math. His parents had tried everything... tutors, mentors, flash cards, special learning centers. In short, everything they could think of to help his math. Finally, in a last ditch effort, they took Zachary down and enrolled him in the local Catholic school.

After the first day, little Zachary came home with a very serious look on his face. He didn't even kiss his mother hello. Instead, he went straight to his room and Started studying. Books and papers were spread out all over the room and little Zachary was hard at work. His mother was amazed. She called him down to dinner. To her shock, the minute he was done, he marched back to his room without a word, and in no time, he was back hitting the books as hard as before.

This went on for some time, day after day, while the mother tried to understand what made all the difference. Finally, little Zachary brought home his report card. He quietly laid it on the table, went up to his room and hit the books. With great trepidation, his Mom looked at it and to her great surprise, little Zachary got an 'A' in math. She could no longer hold her curiosity. She went to his room and said, 'Son, what was it? Was it the nuns?'

Little Zachary looked at her and Shook his head, no.

'Well, then,' she replied, Was it the books, the discipline, the structure, the Uniforms? 'WHAT WAS IT ALREADY?'

Little Zachary looked at her and said, 'Well, on the first day of school when I saw that guy nailed to the plus sign, I knew they weren't fooling around.'

Urgent Legislative Alert

Folks,

Below is an update from the Diocese of Raleigh about NC House Bill 88. Please support our Bishops in combating the rampant immorality being passed off as "education" in our public schools.

April 30, 2009

Dear Brothers and Sisters in Christ:

We seek your assistance in defeating a sexuality education bill that is being voted on by the North Carolina Senate as early as today or possibly at the beginning of next week. A modified version of House Bill 88 (HB88), the “Healthy Youth Act,” was approved by the State House of Representatives on April 16 and is now before the State Senate for consideration. Although the present version of this bill is an improvement over the original, it still would expose children as young as the 7th grade to all forms of FDA approved contraception (e.g., male/female condoms, emergency, oral and/or implanted contraceptives, spermicides, vaginal rings, etc.). It also does not include education on sexual assault and sexual abuse for those children whose parents choose the abstinence until marriage (AUM) option. We recommend that this be added to the AUM curriculum. Abstinence education about drugs, alcohol and tobacco is the only permissible curriculum allowed in our schools. Yet HB88 in its present form will endorse sexual behaviors that are immoral and are high risk for sexually transmitted diseases.We ask you to contact your Senator in Raleigh as soon as possible and tell him or her that you oppose the passage of the “Healthy Youth Act.” You may send your Senator a message by clicking the link below.

Sincerely,

The Most Reverend Peter J. JugisBishop of Charlotte

The Most Reverend Michael F. Burbidge Bishop of Raleigh

Click the link below to log in and send your message:

http://www.votervoice.net/link/target/cvnc32430903.aspx

The following e-mail alert on this same topic was received this morning from a friend. Please read the alert on H-88 sex education bill [in North Carolina] that forces school districts to provide contraception information to 7th graders in addition to abstinence only sex ed. Research shows that giving this info actually increases sexual activity in children. Follow links to contact your legislator.

[To view this message as a web page, go here.]

Special Alert

Two bills passed the Senate Mental Health and Youth Services Committee late Wednesday afternoon and could be headed to the floor of the Senate as early as Thursday morning, April 30. Please contact your state Senator and ask them to vote against these bills.

Senate Bill 526-School Violence Protection Act (otherwise know as the "Bullying Bill) would require each local public school administrative unit to adopt a policy prohibiting bullying or harassing behavior. As stated in the bill, "sexual orientation" and "gender identity" are two of the "actual or perceived differentiating characteristic(s)" that could trigger a claim of bullying. Local school districts will be able to add other criteria, according to the bill. Please contact your Senator and ask them to OPPOSE SB 526.

House Bill 88-Healthy Youth Act would require 104 school districts (of 115 in NC) that only teach Abstinence from Sex Until Marriage (AUM) to add a condom-based Comprehensive Sex Education (CSE) track to their sex education curriculum. Although the House-passed version is an improvement over the original bill, HB 88 would require instruction in all forms of FDA approved contraception as early as the 7th grade. Please contact your Senator and ask them to OPPOSE HB 88.

Please select this link to go to our website and select the Citizen Action Center. Thank you!

Is Swine Flu Caused by Porkulus

Folks,

I regularly visit Dr. Jerry Pournelle's Chaos Manor web site. He was the science advisor to President Reagan who helped to write the "Star Wars" portion of one of Reagan's State of the Union speeches. With Dr. Stefan T. Possony and USAF Col. Francis X. Kane he also wrote a paper entitled The Strategy of Technology which I encourage every reader to review and study. Coincidentally, as I am given to understand, Dr. Pournelle is also a devout Catholic. Of course, that doesn't mean that his writings have or deserve an Imprimatur or Nihil Obstat - he is primarily a science and political writer and as such his topics aren't related to ecclesial or theological ones.

This week Dr. Pournelle had made several entries which may interest the gentle reader. First, here is Monday's entry. Please note the second to the last sentence about the Obama Administration effectively ignoring nuclear energy. I do wish my friends at various pro-nuclear blog sites would realize that ingratiating themselves with the far left liberals has done nothing to advance and everything to oppose the growth of new nuclear capacity in the United States.

Thought for the day: is swine flu caused by porkulus?

On a more serious note: I have had little comment on the current administration's economic policies, in part because there's nothing to say that others aren't already saying, and in part because I really don't wish the nation ill. It is also depressing. In 100 days we seem to have spent more money than anyone ever has in the history of the Republic. This enormous spike in spending and the national debt will have to be paid somehow. The claim is that we will grow the economy to do that. Perhaps, but the deficit financing has often been paid by taxing savings and fixed incomes by the process known as inflation. The results of that have never been beneficial, and sometimes have been disastrous.

What is certain is that the government now controls far more of the economy than it ever has in peace time. We have not yet got to rationing, price controls, wage controls, etc. Perhaps we never will. We do have a larger proportion of people on the government payroll than we have thought needed, but that too may be a good trend.

Several correspondents keep assuring me that the path to socialism is easy and pleasant, and the result will be what Europe has been doing for the past century. They're way ahead of us over there and it's time for the United States to catch up. All is going to be well. Communism came in by revolution, never by constitutional vote, and things are going to be just fine as we begin to civilize as Europe has.

After all, no country has ever followed the classic pattern described since Aristotle in which the have nots voted themselves benefits to be paid for by those who have, resulting in the destruction of the society.

Yes, I have heard of Communism -- as something resulting from revolution or foreign conquest, but never, ever from "creeping socialism" in a republican setting; the social democracies of Europe are not one step closer to it than they were 50 years ago.

They may not be one step closer to communism but they are certainly some steps farther from what we used to call a free society. Go back through the Letters from England for examples. For those who want to know more about the classical arguments against direct democracy, I recommend Parkinson's Evolution of Political Thought; but then I have recommended that before.

The news is full of praise for the coolness and brilliance of the current administration, and how we need to have patience while trusting in the brain trust. I fear I have seen no evidence of this, and in fact most of the policies of the Administration seem to come from the Congressional side. I had not heard that Pelosi and Reid were thought to be especially brilliant. And I have seen few signs that the policies adopted are going to grow our way out of the enormous debts we have acquired in the last 100 days. What I have seen is momentum toward greater expansion of government obligations while imposing ever heavier burdens on those who produce energy. What I have seen and see now is a looming energy crisis.

The correlation between productivity and energy cost is high and negative. Most "green" energy measures make economic sense only when oil prices are above $150 a barrel. Oil isn't going to be at that price unless we make it so by taxes. Meanwhile what seems to be in the wind is a war on coal in the United States (but not in China -- perhaps we can export coal to China to pay some of the debt?) while in practice ignoring the nuclear option.

We do live in interesting times.

I remind you that despair is a sin.

Now here is Wednesday's entry:

Roberta [my wife] says that it's clear that swine flu is caused by porkulus.

The political and economic news is complicated, as expected. The financial geniuses have discovered that many of those whose mortgages are failing owe on both first and second mortgages. In some cases they borrowed their down payment. In other cases, they bought the house, then, when the value of the house went way up, they took out a mortgage to "cash in" on their increased equity, then spent the money, perhaps on investments that went bad, perhaps on home improvements, perhaps on travel, perhaps on medical expenses and emergencies, and perhaps on a trip to Las Vegas that didn't turn out so well. In any event they do not have the money, and they now owe more than the house is worth; and while the credit swaps and other derivatives involving first mortgages are complicated, those involving second mortgages are far more so.

I note that the credit rating agencies, still built into the law -- you are required to go buy a rating from one of the Four if you wish to issue bonds -- still exist, still have legal monopolies, and still have made no restitution for having rated, for payment, pure junk that they certainly did not understand as having the same safety as Treasury Bonds. I do not understand why no one is upset about this -- and why the practice continues. Nor do I understand why anyone in his right mind would pay the slightest attention to a "rating" from one of those companies. They have proven they do not know sewage from Shinola, and they will in fact, for enough money, rate the town drunk as a reliable borrower.

Leaving out the paradox of the survival of the ratings agencies whose incompetence caused the financial crisis -- had they given the credit swap derivatives a rating of junk, we would not be in this mess -- we now have both a financial and a moral problem. What do we do about toxic mortgages? Example: a pair of just graduated yuppies "buy" a house, borrowing the principal on a "stated income" loan. They borrowed the down payment on another. They "stated" their income based on their expectations for jobs. Both have degrees in sociology. Both got jobs at decent salaries, but they found that the payments on their house and their student loans were eating nearly all the income. Still they got along. Their house rose in value. Rose again. Kept going up. They renegotiated their loans to lower interest rates, and while they were at it, borrowed more on their increased equity so they could take a proper honeymoon.

Then came the crash. The value of their house fell back to below what they had paid for it in the first place (and far below the "value" it held at its height). Meanwhile their companies downsized. One job vanished. The other was redefined with a lower salary. And now they are in default. What ought to be done about this "toxic asset"?

I don't think that there is anything I can add except to point out that if we as a nation continue in our immorality (i.e., murdering our unborn, promoting gay marriage, etc.), then we should expect NO prosperity, NO economic recovery, NO peace, and NO liberty. People may ask, "What does morality have to do with toxic debt and creeping socialism?" The answer is simple: Defy God's Law and suffer the consequences. God is perfect love, but He is also perfect Justice - two sides of the same coin.

Zeal

First of all, this is NOT a criticism of any of the fine pro-nuclear energy people at NEI Nuclear Notes, Atomic Insights, Energy from Thorium or Left Atomics. I pray for their success in making low cost, pollution free energy available to everyone. That is a noble and august goal, and I have nothing but respect and admiration for them. However, I disagree with any ingratiation before the current Administration. Let me explain.

Over at the NEI Nuclear Notes blog site there was an entry entitled The Unbending Squirrel. This entry was about the funny antics of a French anti-nuclear energy activist. Several individuals commented on the entry to express their desire that we who are pro-nuclear energy would have the same kind of passion or zeal as those who are anti-nuclear energy. I responded by stating the following:

Sadly, people who show passion about issues get labeled as fanatics. In today's liberal society, equality somehow means mediocrity and sameness. I was once very passionate about nuclear energy. Obviously, I am still pro-nuclear. But I found that there are issues far more important than nuclear energy: morality and righteousness. When some (NOT all) very knowledgeable and intelligent and articulate pro-nuclear people sit opposite the table on such non-negotionable issues, I lose my passion for things pro-nuclear. Yes, I want NEI to succeed. I would love for Atomic Insights to build its first gas cooled reactor. And Energy from Thorium's liquid molten salt reactor sounds fascinating. But none of that is going to matter if this country doesn't return to being a really Christian country, and that's the bottom line. Of course, it's not popular to say those words anymore, but say them I do.

A person who goes by the pseudonym Finrod responded with the following:

So Ioannes, if a non-Christian supports nuclear power, does that mean that your passion for the prospect of all the benefits nuclear power can bring is diminished? If non-Christians come out in support of any good cause, does that mean that Christians shouldn't support it?

I'm not following your reasoning here.

The answer to this is very simple: I am a Catholic Christian first and foremost, NOT Republican, NOT pro-nuclear energy, NOT even American. I am Catholic – period. We only spend 70 or so years here on Earth; we will spend all of Eternity in one of two places: Heaven or Hell. My goal is Heaven, and my citizenship is with the King of kings and Lord of lords.

Now when normally outstanding and well-spoken pro-nuclear energy people (whom I admire and respect greatly) lend credence to a President who supports the infanticide of 1.5 million unborn babies every year in the United States, and exports that same policy to other countries, and promotes within his Administration people who further the practice of infanticide, then I lose my fervor for supporting nuclear energy.

I have said this before and I shall say it again. No amount of nuclear energy will cause this nation to prosper as long as we:

- Experiment on our unborn babies for their stem cells
- Murder our unborn babies under the false notion of the right to chose
- Support the immorality of homosexual marriage, and
- Put to death the terminally ill under the false notion that that’s death with dignity.

Do I support nuclear energy? YES! Do I want NEI to succeed? YES! Do I want to see new reactors built by Westinghouse, GE-Hitachi and Areva? YES! But do I support ingratiating ourselves before an Administration that “believes in” baby murdering? NO!

King Manasseh of Judah did similar evil in the sight of the Lord. He even made his son to walk through fire. As a result, the Lord allowed him to be carried away into captivity by the Assyrians. Apparently he was led away by a nose ring. The story is in 2 Kings 21 and 2 Chronicles 33. The same thing can happen to our President unless he repents, and failure to repent will be a disaster for the country. We cannot wish our President to fail, but success can only come by subservience to the Lord. Yup, there's that "nasty" phrase that many of us don't like - "subservience to the Lord."

There are issues that trump nuclear energy. One cannot compromise one’s principles and work with the devil. 2 Chronicles 7:14 states, “…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.”

America was once a Christian nation, and that’s why we have prospered for so long. Now we are a neo-pagan nation where children bring guns into schools and prostitute themselves at 13 years of age. We live where two men getting married is extolled as normal, but Miss California is abnormal because she supports the sanctity of marriage between man and woman. We live where people don’t accept responsibility for their actions, having promiscuous wonton sex whenever they wish and then wanting the resulting baby to be murdered as a right to chose. We live where prayer to God is forbidden in school, but sex education that teaches use of condoms (and condones promiscuity) is promoted. Even so-called Catholic Universities are defying Church Authority and inviting abortionists to receive honorary doctorates in law. This is completely insane. Good has become bad and bad good. If we don’t repent, then we will be punished by what we have sown. As Galatians 6:7-8 states:

Make no mistake: God is not mocked, for a person will reap only what he sows, because the one who sows for his flesh will reap corruption from the flesh, but the one who sows for the spirit will reap eternal life from the spirit.

Again, we should all offer up our prayers in support of those who are trying desparately to solve our country's energy and pollution problems, and nuclear power can go a long ways towards doing that. But there are issues far more important than that, and diminishing or marginalizing old fashion Christian principles as obsolete will not bring about the desired prosperity.

Humor - Photo of the Day

Folks,

I saw another photo over at LOL Cats that I just have to share. Enjoy!

Today's Gospel Reading

Folks,

Today's Gospel Reading from Jn 6:22-29 is illustrative of what I have been trying to say when discussing the false gospel of social justice. The crowd of 5000 that had been fed the loaves and fishes followed Jesus around the Sea of Galilee to Capernaum.

And when they found him across the sea they said to him,"Rabbi, when did you get here?" Jesus answered them and said,"Amen, amen, I say to you, you are looking for me not because you saw signs but because you ate the loaves and were filled. Do not work for food that perishes but for the food that endures for eternal life, which the Son of Man will give you. For on him the Father, God, has set his seal."

The purpose of the Gospel is NOT to fill bellies, but to save souls. Nevertheless, there is a promise and God will keep it. Today's Office of Readings from the Liturgy of the Hours includes Revelation chapter 7. Verses 9 through 17 bear repeating.

After this I had a vision of a great multitude, which no one could count, from every nation, race, people, and tongue. They stood before the throne and before the Lamb, wearing white robes and holding palm branches in their hands. They cried out in a loud voice: "Salvation comes from our God, who is seated on the throne, and from the Lamb." All the angels stood around the throne and around the elders and the four living creatures. They prostrated themselves before the throne, worshiped God, and exclaimed: "Amen. Blessing and glory, wisdom and thanksgiving, honor, power, and might be to our God forever and ever. Amen." Then one of the elders spoke up and said to me, "Who are these wearing white robes, and where did they come from?" I said to him, "My lord, you are the one who knows." He said to me, "These are the ones who have survived the time of great distress; they have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb. "For this reason they stand before God's throne and worship him day and night in his temple. The one who sits on the throne will shelter them. They will not hunger or thirst anymore, nor will the sun or any heat strike them. For the Lamb who is in the center of the throne will shepherd them and lead them to springs of life-giving water, and God will wipe away every tear from their eyes."

There will come a time when no bellies will ever be empty again, and that will happen because of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. In the meantime, if we wish to be numbered among the multitude whom St. John saw before the Throne of the Lamb, then we who call ourselves Catholic Christians would do well to remember Matthew 25:31-46.

100 Days in Office

Folks,

The American Papist blog site carried a report from World Net Daily about a new painting of Barack Obama to be unveiled at his first 100 days in office.

Sadly, it's apparent that most people don't understand that the initials of our President's name are "BO", not "JC". I leave to the reader to interpret that for himself.

Socialism

Anyone who is Catholic and who favors socialism is advised to read Pope Leo XIII’s Encyclicals Rerum Novarum and Quod Apostolici Muneris. Just left click your mouse cursor on the hyperlinks provided in the preceding sentence. I also encourage the interested reader to review and study Pope Pius XI’s Encyclical Quadragesimo Anno.

Socialism involves a grave error. It assumes that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. This is very much like asking, “Which is worth more: one life or a million lives?” The answer is that life (whether one or a million) is always priceless and can never be reduced to mere quantification. The needs of the minority matter every bit as much as the needs of the majority, and nothing is more “minor” than the individual. Democracy, the other side of the coin whose head is Socialism, is based on the principle of two wolves and one sheep voting on what’s for dinner. The wolves must be fed; otherwise they starve.

Every human being has three parts to his life: a past, a present and a future. A human being’s past is the product of his effort, which is his property. His present is his life. His future is his freedom. To take someone’s property is to steal his past. To take someone’s life is to murder his present. To take someone’s future is to enslave him. Stealing, murder and enslavement are all inherently evil.

By redistributing a man’s rightfully earned property to those whom the State decides are in need, Socialism steals a man’s past.

By making the fruits of his present efforts subject to whims of the State, Socialism murders a man’s present.

By subjugating the fruits of a man’s continued efforts to the needs of the State, Socialism enslaves a man’s future.

As such, Socialism is inherently wrong. What is right is for men to own what they rightfully earn – this is their past. It is right for men to live, and work and earn and make their own individual mark on society. And it is right for men to have freedom, the self-determination to produce and support themselves by their own efforts, and to be responsible and accountable for their actions without the expectation that nanny government will always bail them out of a bad situation that their own lack of proper prior planning has created. Socialism negates the principle that “whatsoever a man soweth, that also shall he reap”.

The Early New Testament Church tried communal living and holding all property in common. Sadly, it didn’t work. Ananias and Sapphira sold their land, but gave only a portion of the proceeds to the community. They lied to St. Peter, falsely claiming that the money which they had laid at the Apostles’ feet was everything they had received from their land sale. St. Peter called them on this lie, and as the gentle reader may recall, both died instantaneously, one after the other, for having lied to the Holy Spirit. They did NOT die because they failed to give ALL their money to the Apostles. Rather, they died because they lied. And they lied because they wanted the public acclamation of generosity, but the private security of their own wealth. If they had told the truth – that they had laid only a portion of their land sale at the Apostles’ feet, then I suppose that they would not have been struck dead. Their guilt was NOT in owning property. Their guilt was in lying. After that episode, communal living gradually fell into disuse.

People want and need to own (and be responsible and accountable for) their past, and that past is their property. It is never right to confiscate someone’s past “for the greater good”. Rather, giving must be voluntarily or it isn’t pleasing to God. Forced redistribution is always wrong.

Forgiveness

Folks,

Today's Liturgical readings from Sacred Scripture included Acts 3:13-15, 17-19, Ps 4:2, 4, 7-8, 9, 1 Jn 2:1-5a and Lk 24:35-48. Instead of speaking on the Gospel reading, Msgr. Matt (during his homily at St. Therese) focused on Peter's sermon to the Jews in Jerusalem which was given after Peter had healed a crippled beggar at the Gate called Beautiful.

Now my Dad had us kids read this passage of Scripture a hundred times during our youth, yet never had I previously paid attention to what Peter said in verse 17 of Acts chapter 3, "Now I know, brothers, that you acted out of ignorance [in murdering Jesus], just as your leaders did..." As Msgr. Matt explained, Peter did not spend time berating, condemning and reviling the Jewish people and religious leaders who demanded that Pontius Pilate release Barabbas and crucify Jesus.

Rather, in verses 18 through 20 Peter goes on to say, "...but God has thus brought to fulfillment what he had announced beforehand through the mouth of all the prophets, that his Messiah would suffer. Repent, therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be wiped away, and that the Lord may grant you times of refreshment and send you the Messiah already appointed for you, Jesus..."

When somebody does something horrible to me or to a friend, do I seek revenge, or do I say, "Father forgive them for they know not what they do"? It took a lot for Peter to learn that lesson. His three denials before the crucifixion followed after the Resurrection by being asked three times if he really loved Jesus. Now, having healed the crippled beggar, he had to face the very people who likely cried for Jesus' crucifixion and forgive them just as he was forgiven.

I suppose that all of the Disciples could have harbored deep and abiding resentments against the Pharisees and Sadducees and others who helped to put Jesus to death. But they didn't. This reminds me of what the Big Book of Alcoholics Anonymous says on pages 66 and 67:

It is plain that a life which includes deep resentment leads only to futility and unhappiness. To the precise extent that we permit these, do we squander the hours that might have been worth while. But with the alcoholic, whose hope is the maintenance and growth of a spiritual experience, this business of resentment is infinitely grave. We found that it is fatal. For when harboring such feelings we shut ourselves off from the sunlight of the Spirit. The insanity of alcohol returns and we drink again. And with us, to drink is to die.

If we were to live, we had to be free of anger. The grouch and the brainstorm were not for us. They may be the dubious luxury of normal men, but for alcoholics these things are poison.
We turned back to the list, for it held the key to the future. We were prepared to look at it from an entirely different angle. We began to see that the world and its people really dominated us. In that state, the wrong-doing of others, fancied or real, had power to actually kill. How could we escape? We saw that these resentments must be mastered, but how? We could not wish them away any more than alcohol.

This was our course: We realized that the people who wronged us were perhaps spiritually sick. Though we did not like their symptoms and the way these disturbed us, they, like ourselves, were sick too. We asked God to help us show them the same tolerance, pity, and patience that we would cheerfully grant a sick friend. When a person offended we said to ourselves, "This is a sick man. How can I be helpful to him? God save me from being angry. Thy will be done."

We avoid retaliation or argument. We wouldn't treat sick people that way. If we do, we destroy our chance of being helpful. We cannot be helpful to all people, but at least God will show us how to take a kindly and tolerant view of each and every one.

What above is true for the alcoholic is also true for any of us who remain in a spirit of unforgiveness and resentment. Peter did not allow the cultivation of such a spirit within him when he explained to the people who had murdered Jesus what exactly they had done. He said, "Now I know, brothers, that you acted out of ignorance..." He avoided retaliation and argument. He treated those to whom he was speaking as spiritually sick people, not as inherently evil people. He acted with forgiveness.

I wonder if I shall be successful in remembering Msgr. Matt's homily tomorrow when I face life out in the open. ;-) As Bill Wilson wrote more than a half decade ago, "God save me from being angry. Thy will be done."

Is Rich Bad?

Folks,

For those of you who have been able to keep up with reading entries at this blog site, you may recall that a commenter recently wrote:

"So...clearly even Jesus poised: 'How hard it is for those who have wealth to enter the kingdom of God! For it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the kingdom of God.' That, in ANY language: Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic or Latin means 'Rich is Bad'. There is a *dynamic* to this metaphor Jesus uses."

Is that true? Is "rich" the same as "bad"? St. Paul writes in 1 Timothy 6:8-10:

"If we have food and clothing, we shall be content with that. Those who want to be rich are falling into temptation and into a trap and into many foolish and harmful desires, which plunge them into ruin and destruction. For the love of money is the root of all evils, and some people in their desire for it have strayed from the faith and have pierced themselves with many pains."

But, on the other hand, if one does earn wealth through his productivity, then is that bad per se?

Indeed, are riches in and of themselves bad, or is it elevating them to idolhood that separates man from God? St. Paul identifies the answer quite clearly, "For the love of money is the root of all evils..."

Money (or wealth or riches or property or whatever term you prefer to designate the product of someone's effort and sweat and toil) is in and of itself neither good nor bad. But when money becomes one's first love and not God, when love of money prevents love of one's neighbor as one's self, then that is the condition which is bad.

If money (or wealth or riches or property or whatever term you prefer to designate the product of someone's effort and sweat and toil), then why did God bless Job with more riches at the end of his trials than he had before his trials began? Why did God bless Solomon? Indeed, why were Jesus' feet in John 12 annointed with 300 denarii worth of perfumed oil? Judas Iscariot, the man who would beray Christ, pointed out that the oil was worth 300 days wages which could have been donated to the poor. What was Jesus' response? John 12:8 says, "You always have the poor with you, but you do not always have me."

Money (or wealth or riches or property or whatever term you prefer to designate the product of someone's effort and sweat and toil) is not bad. But love of money - now that is bad.

People often get confused by the story of the rich young ruler in Matthew 19:16-30. By the way, this story is also recorded in Mark 10:17-31 and Luke 18:18-30. The people back in Jesus day, on witnessing the conversation between Jesus and the rich young ruler who had kept the Law of Moses all his life, but who could not remove his riches as his idol, exclaimed "Who then can be saved?" Jesus said, "What is impossible with men is possible with God."

Riches (money, property, wealth, etc.) must never become an idol between one's self and God. The two greatest commandments still apply: we must love God with all our heart, mind and strength, and we must love our neighbor as ourselves. When riches become an idol which prevent fulfilling those two greatest of commandments, then the idol must be removed so that one's soul may be saved.

Remember also, dear reader, that many rich people, among whom were some wealthy women, helped to finance St. Paul's missionary journeys. Riches can be used for good or bad. By our own free will we determine how they will be used.

Unjustified Compensation

Folks,

There was an essay over at the Darwin Catholic blog site that discussed the Unjustified Compensation of corporate executives in America. I encourage the reader to study the essay and carefully consider the following (which I entered as a comment at that blog site):

A person deserves all the wealth that a person legally and legitimately produces. No one gets to redistribute from a person who produces to those who do not produce. Socialism - wealth redistributionism - is always wrong.

Now that being said, our corporate executives in "Amerika" are NOT entrepeneurs in a free market but corporatists aided and abetted by the government in a mixed economy. They don't EARN wealth; they STEAL wealth and therein lies the difference. No one gets to steal.

Let's put it this way: a man invests in a gold mine, works 12 hour days years on end and eventually becomes filthy rich. HE is entitled to ALL his money; he worked for it.

Now another man who's a financial mercenary goes from compnay to company slashing and burning, and then bailing out with golden parachutes, all the while producing NO new wealth. Is he entitled to millions? Of course not! Socialism - whether corporate socialism or welfare socialism - is inherently immoral.

-----

I encourage every reader to play the slide show on Self Ownership over at the The Adventures of Jonathan Gullible web site (it takes about ten minutes to view and some people don't like the accompanying music, so you may want to turn the volume on your speakers down). Now before you go there, please bear in mind this: when the slide show says no one owns you and you are beholden to no one, that you own your life, it is speaking strictly in human terms. We all realize that God has a claim on each of us. But NO human has a claim on your life or my life. That's the first principle of freedom: the individual right to life, which starts at conception and ends at natural death. The second principle is the non-initiation of force. It is implicit in these two principles that no matter how filthy rich you become through honest labor, no one has any right to take your wealth away from you. NO ONE. The proof is in the story of Jesus and the rich young ruler in Luke 18:18-27:

An official asked him this question, "Good teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?" Jesus answered him, "Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone. You know the commandments, 'You shall not commit adultery; you shall not kill; you shall not steal; you shall not bear false witness; honor your father and your mother.'" And he replied, "All of these I have observed from my youth." When Jesus heard this he said to him, "There is still one thing left for you: sell all that you have and distribute it to the poor, and you will have a treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me." But when he heard this he became quite sad, for he was very rich. Jesus looked at him (now sad) and said, "How hard it is for those who have wealth to enter the kingdom of God! For it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the kingdom of God." Those who heard this said, "Then who can be saved?" And he said, "What is impossible for human beings is possible for God."

Jesus NEVER told His disciples to confiscate the rich young ruler's possessions and redistribute the wealth to the poor. Jesus never said that Caesar should tax the rich man into submission and use the taxes to feed the poor. Jesus said that if the rich young ruler wanted to enter the Kingdom of Heaven, then he had to get rid of the idol between him and God, and that idol was his riches. The giving to the poor MUST be voluntary. NO ONE has any right to force the rich to give to the poor. Even Jesus with all the power of the cosmos at His beck and call did NOT do that even though He could have done it.

You own yourself completely and totally just as I own myself. No other human being has ANY claim on your life or mine. The question is this: will either of us put idols between us and the Kingdom of Heaven. You see, there are two primary principles of freedom:

1. The individual right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness
2. The non-initiation of force

And there are two primary commandments on which all the Law and the Prophets hang:

1. Love God with all our heart and with all our soul and with all our strength
2. Love our neighbor as ourselves

These two sets of principles compliment each other. Love of neighbor can never be legislated. It can never come by taxation, wealth redistribution, judicial action, etc. It has to come from love of God. And without freedom there is no love of God.

You own yourself and your belongings. They are a gift from God. Use them to help others. Do what nanny government is always incapable of doing.

Torture

Folks,

The other day I was talking with a freind at work about the use of waterboarding to extract information from terrorist to protect the nation. The Catechism of the Catholic Church is very clear regarding torture. Paragraphs 2297 and 2298 states:

Kidnapping and hostage taking bring on a reign of terror; by means of threats they subject their victims to intolerable pressures. They are morally wrong. Terrorism threatens, wounds, and kills indiscriminately; it is gravely against justice and charity. Torture which uses physical or moral violence to extract confessions, punish the guilty, frighten opponents, or satisfy hatred is contrary to respect for the person and for human dignity. Except when performed for strictly therapeutic medical reasons, directly intended amputations, mutilations, and sterilizations performed on innocent persons are against the moral law.

In times past, cruel practices were commonly used by legitimate governments to maintain law and order, often without protest from the Pastors of the Church, who themselves adopted in their own tribunals the prescriptions of Roman law concerning torture. Regrettable as these facts are, the Church always taught the duty of clemency and mercy. She forbade clerics to shed blood. In recent times it has become evident that these cruel practices were neither necessary for public order, nor in conformity with the legitimate rights of the human person. On the contrary, these practices led to ones even more degrading. It is necessary to work for their abolition. We must pray for the victims and their tormentors.

In very simple terms, good can never arise by committing evil. Torturing a prisoner (even by such a mild means as waterboarding) is evil. Torturing even one prisoner on the notion that to do so will save a million lives is inherently wrong. The ends NEVER justifies the means.

That being said, I would caution the careful reader to study what Dr. Jerry Pournelle says about this topic over at his Chaos Manor (http://www.jerrypournelle.com/) web site:

I have a number of messages saying that what the Bush administration did was subject to the laws of war and thus anyone who participated in interrogation of prisoners ought to be prosecuted.

That turns out not to be the case. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francs-tireurs, particularly that last section on status. For partisans to be subject to the laws of war they must meet certain conditions. None of the detainees did.

Now am I subject to prosecution for saying that? Would I be had I been asked by government to give an opinion? Obama has already exempted the operatives who interrogated the prisoners. I do not think he has the political will to prosecute Cabinet officers or a former President or Vice President. That leaves those who were asked for their opinions, and perhaps judges. Is it of benefit to the Republic to prosecute them?

And when there is a successful terrorist attack that kills thousands, what happens then? The Constitution has little to say about Reasons of State as justification for any action. But we have long known that "inter arma, silent leges." In World War II the German saboteurs were executed out of hand, and American citizens of Japanese ancestry were interned under fairly awful conditions. Had the war ended with an Axis victory, those actions would have been prosecuted. As it did end, the US consensus was that the execution of the saboteurs was justified, and the internment of the Japanese was not; and eventually there was a mostly symbolic compensation and a public apology. There were no prosecutions.

If the concern is that we never again use waterboarding and caterpillars as interrogation techniques, that has probably been accomplished. Whether that is good can be debated, but that is the way things are now -- at least until there is another act of terrorism that causes thousands of domestic casualties and scares the hell out of the people.

We do live in interesting times. We also have a lot of pressing problems.

-----

I find it endlessly fascinating that the liberal left cries for the prosecution of Bush Administration Officials for waterboarding, but fully support the right of promiscuous people to murder their own unborn babies. This is becoming a George Orwellian world where right is wrong and wrong right.

By the way, "inter arma, silent leges" is Latin for the phrase "among arms the laws are silent". When we gave up Classical education, we gave up remembrance of the past.

Pictures for the Day

Folks,

Here are another two pictures for the day from the LOL Cats web site. Enjoy!

FERC Chairman Jon Wellinghoff

Folks,

There have been three recent entries each at three different blog sites about President Obama’s appointment of Jon Wellinghoff as Chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Each of these blog sites (NEI Nuclear Notes, Atomic Insights and Energy from Thorium) decries the selection of this lawyer because of his lack of engineering expertise and his thought that the country won’t need future base load coal-fired and nuclear power plants. In his own words

"I think baseload capacity is going to become an anachronism. Baseload capacity really used to only mean in an economic dispatch, which you dispatch first, what would be the cheapest thing to do. Well, ultimately wind's going to be the cheapest thing to do, so you'll dispatch that first."

The relevant articles on the new FERC Chairman may be found by left clicking your mouse cursor on the links provided below:

FERC's Chairman Jon Wellinghoff on Baseload Capacity and Distributed/Centralized Generation
Wellinghoff Is a Dangerous Man
My Nomination for Energy Czar

Rod Adams from Atomic Insights is the most vocal critic and as usual, he is 100% correct. Mr. Wellinghoff believes that renewable energy resources such as wind and solar power are sufficient along with conservation to provide the country’s energy needs without building any more major power stations. This point of view is fallacious for all the reasons pointed out at NEI Nuclear Notes, Atomic Insights and Energy from Thorium. Please read for yourself.

Unfortunately, however, many of the people who are pro-nuclear energy ingratiated themselves with the liberal left to get Obama elected because they were disgusted with George Bush, the War in Iraq, and a 250 billion dollar debt under the Bush Administration. They saw John McCain as "more of the same" in spite of the fact that Senator McCain had promised to push for building 40 new nuclear power plants in the US. They regarded his words as empty promises, pinning their hope on the uniqueness of the first African-American to be elected President. Now we have a left-wing President who is at best ambivalent towards nuclear energy and who has appointed an unqualified person to be chairman of FERC.

Barack Obama is the worst possible choice for the Presidency for reasons pertaining to nuclear energy and for many more reasons far beyond nuclear energy (which are discussed in separate entries at this blog site). Yes, it is true that Stephen Chu, President Obama’s selection for Secretary of the Department of Energy is NOT anti-nuclear per se and has made some “noises” in favor of nuclear energy being a continued part of the US energy mix. But Secretary Chu’s first love is solar power (by his own admission) and solar power cannot supply base load power at the 92% capacity factor that a nuclear power plant can. Furthermore, Secretary Chu is a theoretical physicist and NOT an engineer with a background to understand energy grids and generating stations. Yes, he’s smart, but he isn’t the ideal person as DOE Secretary (though Obama could have chosen worse).

So we have a President who has sunk the country three trillion dollars into debt with little if any of that going for new nuclear generation. His appointees are either ambivalent to nuclear energy or opposed to it. And the economy is in shambles. Again, all those people who supported Obama’s ascendancy to the White House have no one to blame but themselves for this, and in the end, it’ll be the working Mom and Dad who will have to pay. Obama, Wellinghoff and Chu won’t have to tighten their belts one bit.

Now do I think as Charles Barton suggested at Energy from Thorium that Rod Adams from Atomic Insights would be a great FERC Chairman or DOE Secretary? Absolutely, but it likely won’t happen because we have a left wing liberal Democrat President beholden to the anti-nuclear enviro - renewable energy crowd.

Advice to Our National Leaders

Folks,

This evening I went to a Charismatic Prayer meeting at St. Mark's. During the time for Bible reading, Wisdom 6:1-10 came up. In these days when our national leaders have abandoned God's Law by refusing to protect the lives of unborn babies, Solomon's advice is quite applicable.

Hear, therefore, kings, and understand; learn, you magistrates of the earth's expanse! Hearken, you who are in power over the multitude and lord it over throngs of peoples! Because authority was given you by the LORD and sovereignty by the Most High, who shall probe your works and scrutinize your counsels! Because, though you were ministers of his kingdom, you judged not rightly, and did not keep the law, nor walk according to the will of God, Terribly and swiftly shall he come against you, because judgment is stern for the exalted - For the lowly may be pardoned out of mercy but the mighty shall be mightily put to the test. For the Lord of all shows no partiality, nor does he fear greatness, Because he himself made the great as well as the small, and he provides for all alike; but for those in power a rigorous scrutiny impends. To you, therefore, O princes, are my words addressed that you may learn wisdom and that you may not sin.

[NOTE: Yes, I realize that Protestants do not accept the Deuterocanonical Books of the Old Testament (including the Wisdom of Solomon) as part of their Scriptures, but since the New Testament Church times these books have been considered canonical. Indeed, the Scriptures the Apostles used were the Greek Septuagint translation of the Old Testament which included Sirach, Wisdom, Judith, Tobit, Baruch, and 1st and 2nd Maccabbees, as well as parts of Esther and Daniel that Martin Luther in 1521 AD removed on his own recognizance. Whatever the readers' feelings in this matter may be, what follows is still applicable to our country today.]

Capital Punishment

Folks,

The American Papist blog site recently had an entry on how Archbishop Chaput is credited for the Colorado death penalty repeal vote. Just click on the link to read the entry. Of course this is quite commendable and something for which we ought to praise God. However, a clear distinction needs to be made between the authority that God Himself gave the State, and the intrinsic evil that is abortion.

Romans 13:1-7 and 1 Peter 2:13-17 (reprinted further on) make the subject of Capital Punishment very clear. God has given to the State the authority to put to death those who initiate force against others. That is a very different scenario than either abortion (i.e., the initiation of force against an unborn baby) or euthanasia (i.e., the initiation of force against a terminally ill patient). The former is the protection of the individuals of society against a person who himself or herself is murderous; the latter two examples are the murder of the innocent and defenseless.

Now paragraphs 2266 and 2267 in the Catechism of the Catholic Church states the following:

The efforts of the state to curb the spread of behavior harmful to people's rights and to the basic rules of civil society correspond to the requirement of safeguarding the common good. Legitimate public authority has the right and the duty to inflict punishment proportionate to the gravity of the offense. Punishment has the primary aim of redressing the disorder introduced by the offense. When it is willingly accepted by the guilty party, it assumes the value of expiation. Punishment then, in addition to defending public order and protecting people's safety, has a medicinal purpose: as far as possible, it must contribute to the correction of the guilty party.

Assuming that the guilty party's identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor. If, however, non-lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people's safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means, as these are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the common good and more in conformity with the dignity of the human person. Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state has for effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm—without definitively taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself—the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity "are very rare, if not practically non-existent.

Thus, the Catholic Christian opposes Capital Punishment. Morally, it is better when possible to incarcerate the evil-doer for the remainder of his or her life than to take away his or her life. But God Himself has given that authority to the State. The authority that God has NEVER given to the State is to take away the life of a baby in the womb or the life of a terminally ill patient.

"Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's and unto God that which is God's."

Unfortunately, most people want license without responsibility, without accountability. "Oh, you can do whatever you want - God'll forgive you - God doesn't punish - God is a God of love."

God, being LOVE, is perfect JUSTICE and JUSTICE says that "the wages of sin are death". God is not mocked, and we who think otherwise better heed God's warning.

Romans 13:1-7 explains the authority God has given the State:

Let every person be subordinate to the higher authorities, for there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been established by God. Therefore, whoever resists authority opposes what God has appointed, and those who oppose it will bring judgment upon themselves. For rulers are not a cause of fear to good conduct, but to evil. Do you wish to have no fear of authority? Then do what is good and you will receive approval from it, for it is a servant of God for your good. But if you do evil, be afraid, for it does not bear the sword without purpose; it is the servant of God to inflict wrath on the evildoer. Therefore, it is necessary to be subject not only because of the wrath but also because of conscience. This is why you also pay taxes, for the authorities are ministers of God, devoting themselves to this very thing. Pay to all their dues, taxes to whom taxes are due, toll to whom toll is due, respect to whom respect is due, honor to whom honor is due.

1st Peter 2:13-17 is consistent with this:

Be subject to every human institution for the Lord's sake, whether it be to the king as supreme or to governors as sent by him for the punishment of evildoers and the approval of those who do good. For it is the will of God that by doing good you may silence the ignorance of foolish people. Be free, yet without using freedom as a pretext for evil, but as slaves of God. Give honor to all, love the community, fear God, honor the king.

Therefore, Capital Punishment is NOT equivalent to either abortion or euthanasia. Yes, all life is precious and one cannot say that one person's life - an unborn baby - is more precious than another's life - a hardened criminal. Our Lord loves all equally and we are commanded to do the same. But there is a significant difference between the State discharging its duty according to the injunctions of the Epistle of Paul to the Romans and the first Epistle of Peter, and the murder of a defenseless, helpless baby. That difference lies not just in the nature of the act itself, but also in the representative numbers: 1.5 million babies every year (over 2 babies every minute) vs the few hundred capital punishments per year. We know that the first is a heinous crime against humanity and God. But the second is NOT, and even if it were, while all human life is precious, it pales in comparison to the infanticide we commit minute by minute. Being pro-life across the board is the ideal; sometimes that means that the State has to discharge its duty as described in Sacred Scripture, for "the wages of sin are death".

Indeed, God has not repealed any part of Sacred Scripture, including but not limited to Romans 13:1-7 and 1 Peter 2:13-17.

Superior General's Letter to President Obama

Folks,

The American Papist blog site is carrying the text of a 13-page letter to President Obama from the Rev. Hugh W. Cleary, C.S.C. Superior General of the Congregation of Holy Cross, which oversees Notre Dame University. As many of you know, Father Jenkins, the Administrative President of Notre Dame, invited President Obama to give this year's graduation cermony speech and to receive an honorary doctorate in laws. He did so without consulting Bishop D'Arcy, his local ordinary. This is scandalous given that President Obama fully supports the murder of unborn babies as a "woman's right to chose". Please left click your mouse cursor on this 13-page letter to read its text. While the Superior General congradulates President Obama on receiving an honorary doctorate in laws, much of the letter is devoted to pointing out the unacceptability of President Obama's stance on infanticide.

By the way, Bishop D'Arcy's letter (or at least the public portion thereof) to Father Jenkins concerning his incorrect invitation to President Obama may found here.

We must pray for the conversion of President Obama and Vice President Biden. We must pray that the Holy Spirit moves the heart of Father Jenkins to stand up for Catholic Christian values and principles. Pray the Rosary. Pray the Chaplet of Divine Mercy.

1 Thessalonians 5:17: "Pray without ceasing".

Job Layoffs

Folks,

Please remember in your prayers those co-workers of mine who have just recently received notices of dismissal to become effective during the middle of next month. One of these is my dear Pentecostal sister in Christ. This lady has a large family to support and without continued constant employment faces terrible challenges. She came to my office cube yesterday and sat with me while we said a brief prayer for the Lord to intercede for her, her husband and her children.

Sadly, the strain on the economy affects big corporations as well as small companies, and it is always the little guy or girl who ends up getting devastated. Yet we just have to believe God's promises in Matthew 6:25-34:

"Therefore I tell you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat (or drink), or about your body, what you will wear. Is not life more than food and the body more than clothing? Look at the birds in the sky; they do not sow or reap, they gather nothing into barns, yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are not you more important than they? Can any of you by worrying add a single moment to your life-span? Why are you anxious about clothes? Learn from the way the wild flowers grow. They do not work or spin. But I tell you that not even Solomon in all his splendor was clothed like one of them. If God so clothes the grass of the field, which grows today and is thrown into the oven tomorrow, will he not much more provide for you, O you of little faith? So do not worry and say, 'What are we to eat?' or 'What are we to drink?' or 'What are we to wear?' All these things the pagans seek. Your heavenly Father knows that you need them all. But seek first the kingdom (of God) and his righteousness, and all these things will be given you besides. Do not worry about tomorrow; tomorrow will take care of itself. Sufficient for a day is its own evil."

Vatican To Build 100 Megawatt Solar Power Plant

Folks,

Over at the American Papist blog site, there is an article entitled "Vatican To Build 100 Megawatt Solar Power Plant". One can only commend the Vatican for "thinking green". But as a professional in the electric power industry for 30+ years, my thoughts on the matter are a bit different. I will now take the patient reader on a tour of basic mathematics.

Web page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_energy states the following:

“The rate at which solar radiation reaches a unit of area in space in the region of the Earth's orbit is approximately 1,400 W/m², as measured upon a surface normal (at a right angle) to the Sun. This number is referred to as the solar constant. Of the energy received, roughly 19% is absorbed by the atmosphere, while clouds on average reflect a further 35% of the total energy. The generally accepted standard is for peak power of 1020 W/m² at sea level. [1] The average power, which is an important quantity when one is considering using solar power, is lower. For example, in North America the average power lies somewhere between 125 and 375 W/m², between 3 and 9 kWh/m²/day.[2] It should be noted that maximum solar radiation energy intensity is meant here, and not the power delivered by a photovoltaic panel, which are about 15% efficient. Hence, a solar panel delivers 15 to 60 W/m² or 0.45-1.35 kWh/m²/day (annual day and night average).”

Now folks, consider that the Vatican plans to build a 100 megawatt solar panel array. One megawatt is 1000 kilowatts. One kilowatt is 1000 watts. Thus, one megawatt is one millions watts, and the Vatican plans an array that will deliver 100 million watts of electricity. Note that a solar panel delivers 15 to 60 watts per square meter (which is quite a variation. So how big does this solar panel array have to be? That is where the math comes in.

Assume a best case figure of 60 watts per square meter for solar photovoltaic output. To generate 100 million watts of electricity takes 100 million watts / 60 watts per square meter or 1.67 million square meters.

Now I realize that most of us aren't comfortable with the metric system when measuring area, so let's convert to the English system. 1 square meter is 3.86E-07 square miles. Thus, 1.67 million square meters is 0.643 square miles or 411.8 acres.

Let us now assume a worst case figure of 15 watts per square meter for solar photovoltaic output. To generate 100 million watts of electricity takes 100 million watts / 15 watts per square meter or 6.67 million square meters.

Again, for those of us uncomfortable with the metric system, 1 square meter is 3.86E-07 square miles; this 6.67 million square meters is 2.57 square miles or 1647 acres. Folks, that's a lot of area, a lot more than what a conventional 100 MWe power plant would require. And it won't even work 24 / 7.

By the way, according to the Wikipedia entry on Vatican City, the Vatican occupies only 110 acres. Even at a best case scenario of 60 watts per square meter of electrical power output from solar panels, the Vatican doesn't have the land area to support 100 MWe of solar generation (411.8 acres of solar cells is roughly FOUR times the area that the Vatican occupies - 110 acres).

Now remember a few facts:

(1) The Vatican is located in Rome, Italy which is in the northern hemisphere. Rome, Italy is about at the same latitude as the US state of Massachusetts. That means that for a considerable portion of the year (fall through winter), the sunlight that the Vatican gets is below 12 hours per day, and significantly so for four months. Thus, there is more night time than day time. So the daily energy provided by the solar cells decreases dramatically in fall and winter time.

(2) Solar cells generate no power after the sun has set. When electricity is needed for lighting and the other modern civilized conveniences of life, it isn't available. And battery technology hasn't advanced to the point to be able to generate 100 MWe continuous on such a small scale as the Vatican City State.

Indeed, photovoltaics have what we call a very low capacity factor. Capacity factor is the ratio of the actual output of a power plant over a period of time and its output if it had operated at full nameplate capacity the entire time. So the purveyors of solar cell technology claim 100 MWe. BUT what they are not telling us is that that 100 MWe occurs only a high noon at the summer solstice on a cloudless day. Because of the vagaries of weather conditions and because of inevitable nightfall, capacity factor drops off remarkably. Indeed, even if there were no cloud cover and the sun stood perfect still overhead for 12 hours per 24 hour period, maximum capacity factor for solar photovoltaics can only be 50%. It can NEVER be greater. Now who wants a power plant that delivers energy at a theoretical maximum of 50%, and more often than not in the 15 to 20% range?

Solar energy (like its cousin wind energy) is (quite frankly) a joke on the American and European people. It doesn't work to provide steady, base load electricity. Of course, outside of fossil fuels, there is only one solution that's pollution free and low cost: nuclear energy. The Hyperion Power Generation Corporation has a reactor design that could supply the Vatican's needs for 30 years without refueling. Four 25 MWe Hyperion reactors would easily do the job and have NO down time due to weather vagaries, daytime / night time transitions, etc. I also encourage the interested reader to browse through Rod Adams' essays on small reactors at his Atomic Insights web site.

It seems as though the Vatican is being sold a worthless bill of goods. The right solution is of course nuclear energy. Indeed, perhaps GE-Hitachi's Prism reactor design just might be the ticket.

P.S., I just happen to work with the person who's designing just such a reactor. Life is great, ain't it?

Picture for the Day

Folks,

I came across this photograph at the LOL Cats web site. It's a pity that Republicans and Democrats can't get along as well. Enjoy!

Prayer and Meditation

Folks,

At this evening's Bible Study we had a short digression into prayer, specifically how should we pray and what should we pray for? I actually like how Bill Wilson described this in the Big Book of Alcoholics Anonymous. What follows is on pages 85 through 88 of the Big Book and is a discussion of Step Eleven:

Sought through prayer and meditation to improve our conscious contact with God as we understood Him, praying only for knowledge of His will for us and the power to carry that out.

Step Eleven suggests prayer and meditation. We shouldn't be shy on this matter of prayer. Better men than we are using it constantly. It works, if we have the proper attitude and work at it. It would be easy to be vague about this matter. Yet, we believe we can make some definite and valuable suggestions.

When we retire at night, we constructively review our day. Were we resentful, selfish, dishonest or afraid? Do we owe an apology? Have we kept something to ourselves which should be discussed with another person at once? Were we kind and loving toward all? What could we have done better? Were we thinking of ourselves most of the time? Or were we thinking of what we could do for others, of what we could pack into the stream of life? But we must be careful not to drift into worry, remorse or morbid reflection, for that would diminish our usefulness to others. After making our review we ask God's forgiveness and inquire what corrective measures should be taken.

On awakening let us think about the twenty-four hours ahead. We consider our plans for the day. Before we begin, we ask God to direct our thinking, especially asking that it be divorced from self-pity, dishonest or self-seeking motives. Under these conditions we can employ our mental faculties with assurance, for after all God gave us brains to use. Our thought-life will be placed on a much higher plane when our thinking is cleared of wrong motives.

In thinking about our day we may face indecision. We may not be able to determine which course to take. Here we ask God for inspiration, an intuitive thought or a decision. We relax and take it easy. We don't struggle. We are often surprised how the right answers come after we have tried this for a while.

What used to be the hunch or the occasional inspiration gradually becomes a working part of the mind. Being still inexperienced and having just made conscious contact with God, it is not probable that we are going to be inspired at all times. We might pay for this presumption in all sorts of absurd actions and ideas. Nevertheless, we find that our thinking will, as time passes, be more and more on the plane of inspiration. We come to rely upon it.

We usually conclude the period of meditation with a prayer that we be shown all through the day what our next step is to be, that we be given whatever we need to take care of such problems. We ask especially for freedom from self-will, and are careful to make no request for ourselves only. We may ask for ourselves, however, if others will be helped. We are careful never to pray for our own selfish ends. Many of us have wasted a lot of time doing that and it doesn't work. You can easily see why.

If circumstances warrant, we ask our wives or friends to join us in morning meditation. If we belong to a religious denomination which requires a definite morning devotion, we attend to that also. If not members of religious bodies, we sometimes select and memorize a few set prayers which emphasize the principles we have been discussing. There are many helpful books also. Suggestions about these may be obtained from one's priest, minister, or rabbi. Be quick to see where religious people are right. Make use of what they offer.

As we go through the day we pause, when agitated or doubtful, and ask for the right thought or action. We constantly remind ourselves we are no longer running the show, humbly saying to ourselves many times each day "Thy will be done." We are then in much less danger of excitement, fear, anger, worry, self-pity, or foolish decisions. We become much more efficient. We do not tire so easily, for we are not burning up energy foolishly as we did when we were trying to arrange life to suit ourselves.

It works - it really does.

In explaining Step Eleven, an alternate translation of the prayer of St. Francis of Assisi is provided in Chapter 11 (Page 99) of the "Twelve Steps and Twelve Traditions", another book published by Alcoholics Anonymous World Services, Inc. This prayer is affectionately called the Eleventh Step prayer by members of Alcoholics Anonymous.

Lord, make me a channel of thy peace;
that where there is hatred, I may bring love;
that where there is wrong, I may bring the spirit of forgiveness;
that where there is discord, I may bring harmony;
that where there is error, I may bring truth;
that where there is doubt, I may bring faith;
that where there is despair, I may bring hope;
that where there are shadows, I may bring light;
that where there is sadness, I may bring joy.
Lord, grant that I may seek rather to comfort than to be comforted;
to understand, than to be understood;
to love, than to be loved.
For it is by self-forgetting that one finds.
It is by forgiving that one is forgiven.
It is by dying that one awakens to eternal life.
Amen.

Of course, the Master Himself taught us how to pray:

Our Father, which art in heaven,
hallowed be thy name;
thy kingdom come;
thy will be done,
in earth as it is in heaven.
Give us this day our daily bread.
And forgive us our trespasses,
as we forgive them that trespass against us.
And lead us not into temptation;
but deliver us from evil.
[For thine is the kingdom,
the power, and the glory,
for ever and ever.
Amen.]

Today's Daily Readings - Are You Saved?

Folks,

On Thursday of last week I had the opportunity to give a Catholic Apologetics presentation entitled, “Are You Saved”, at the St. Therese Church. One of the many passages of Sacred Scripture that we studied was of course the famous discourse Jesus gave on this topic in John chapter 3. Just coincidentally, today’s daily Liturgical readings include John 3:1-18. I hope that my students recognize the coincidence.

One of the major themes we discussed about being born again or born from above is what Jesus described must be done in order to achieve that state. Jesus said in verse five that one must be born of water and spirit, literally “gennethe ez hudatos kai pneumatos”. Notice that the article “the” or “tos” in Greek is NOT used before the word “water” or “hudatos” and “spirit” or “pneumatos”. Actual rebirth into the Spirit happens on Baptism. That is why Jesus said in verse ten to Nicodemus, “You are the teacher of Israel and you do not understand this?” The history of the Hebrews should have been sufficient. How was Noah and his family saved? By the waters of the Great Flood. How were the children of Israel released from bondage in Egypt? By passing through the waters of the Red Sea. How was Naaman the Aramean healed of leprosy? By washing himself seven times in the River Jordan.

Now my Pentecostal friends get hung up on this. Often they refer to the statement in Romans 10:9-10 as the only prerequisite for salvation:

“…for, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For one believes with the heart and so is justified, and one confesses with the mouth and so is saved."

My friends cite these verses without working with all the other verses of Scripture. Indeed, Jesus Himself says in Matthew 7:21:

“Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father in heaven.”

Thus, St. Peter (our first Pope) says in the first ever Papal Encyclical (1 Peter 3:18-22):

“For Christ also suffered for sins once, the righteous for the sake of the unrighteous, that he might lead you to God. Put to death in the flesh, he was brought to life in the spirit. In it he also went to preach to the spirits in prison, who had once been disobedient while God patiently waited in the days of Noah during the building of the ark, in which a few persons, eight in all, were saved through water. This prefigured baptism, which saves you now. It is not a removal of dirt from the body but an appeal to God for a clear conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, who has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, with angels, authorities, and powers subject to him.”

Note, dear reader, the phrase, “…in which a few persons, eight in all, were saved through water. This prefigured baptism, which saves you now.”

Often my Pentecostal friends cite an emotional experience occurring when they implement the words of Romans 10:9-10. I have no doubt as to the validity of such an experience. Nevertheless, we are born from above by water and spirit, and while that can entail an emotional experience, it isn’t in and of itself an emotional state, but a spiritual state. Too often we (Catholics, Pentecostals, Baptists, Methodists, etc.) can confuse an emotional upwelling as a spiritual one. That is why it is always good to consult with a spiritual priest who knows Sacred Scripture and the Teaching of the Church. Interpretation of Sacred Scripture cannot be done in the vacuum of the privacy of my own mind. Indeed, one might well argue that my mind is a dangerous place to let me be alone in without adult supervision. The Church gives us that supervision on a general level in the form of Sacred Tradition and the Teaching of the Magisterium as well as on a personal level in the Sacrament of Reconciliation and Penance (which will be the subject of a future blog entry).

So a note to everyone: read today’s daily Liturgical readings. In fact, after left clicking your mouse cursor on that hyperlink, simple save the resulting web page as one of your Internet Explorer favorites. In that way you will always be able to read the daily Liturgical readings each day; now you’ll have no excuse to miss out on your daily Bible readings!

God bless!

An Interesting Event at Work

Folks,

Last Thursday an interesting event occurred at work. While on break a co-worker asked my about the Catholic doctrine on Purgatory. Articles 1030 through 1032 in the Catechism of the Catholic Church provide the official Church teaching. I tried to explain this doctrine as best as I could, for my listener was a Protestant.

Well, unbeknown to us, our conversation was overhead in the office cube near ours. Around the corner came my former manager speaking quite emphatically that we ought to take our conversation elsewhere and that he was offended by the topic. He was quite angry. Of course I apologized for giving any unintended offense. he then launched into another diatribe and I softly stated, "My friend, I apologize." He said "OK" and then left. The Protestant with whom I had been talking and I looked at each other with quite a bit of surprise.

As it turned out - and I explained this to my Protestant friend - the man who had accosted us was once a religious man, perhaps even Catholic. But his wife took grievously ill, whether from Alzheimer's or some other disease we don't know for certain. This man loves his wife with all his heart and thinks that embryonic stem cell research will yield some sort of miraculous cure for his wife. Of course, that isn't case the case. And indeed, the Church vehemently opposes the murder of the unborn whether to harvest their stem cells to save the lives of the born or any other reason . It is always murder to kill a human zygote, embryo or fetus, and no reason such as embryonic stem cell research can ever justify such murder.

Knowing how the Church stands, this man has great anger towards the Church and ostensibly towards God. I cannot fault this man because I realize that he is acting out of the helpless rage he feels in not being able to do anything to effect his wife's recovery. We must pray for him and give him the space he needs. Choking religion down his throat will only push further and further into the morass of resentment.

While I cannot know how this man feels in having to care for his wife who is rapidly approaching an invalid state, I do know what it is like to lose the wife whom I love. My ex-spouse telephoned me the other day to inform me that the State had issued its "approval" to the divorce that she sought (but which I opposed). I love that woman and simultaneously I feel very angry over a situation I cannot control, and over not being with my two little children. But the worst thing for me to do would be to turn my back on the Lord Jesus. I cannot and must not do that. Perhaps this is how the Lord had to allow events to progress to get me to move close to Him. Perhaps now I love my ex-spouse more as we are than I did when we were married. I don't know. These questions are too complicated for me to answer. I just know that I have to put one foot in front of the other and pray for my former manager who is slowly losing his wife to disease, and pray for my ex-spouse whom I have already lost to smoking embers of divorce.

Indeed, if it were not for the good Lord, I would not send support money to my ex-spouse and kids, I would not talk with the children on the phone nightly, I would not send them Easter cards and try to be a decent human being. I may have lost a family, but I have gained a Saviour and a Lord. And that, folks, is the bottom line.

So pray for my manager friend and his sick wife. We cannot know what he is going through. If I had to carry his cross instead of my own, then I would likely buckle underneath. "But for the grace of God, there go I..."

Father Dan Leaving in June, 2009

Dear Ladies and Gentlemen,

I learned today from an insert in the St. Mark Bulletin that Father Dan Oschwald is being re-assigned from being pastor at St. Mark Catholic Church to being Rector of Sacred Heart Cathederal in Raliegh, NC. There he will be directly assisting our Bishop, His Excellency Michael Burbidge. Unfortunately, I can't seem to find on-line the bulletin insert for the Bishop's letter about this. As soon as I do, then I shall post a link to it.

UPDATE: 04/40/2009 - Here is the link to the news announcement from the Diocese of Raleigh concerning Father Dan's re-assignment:

Bishop Burbidge Announces New Rector for Sacred Heart Cathedral

Father Dan is a real man of God. We here in Wilmington, NC have been blessed with most excellent priests, among them Father Dan Oschwald and Father Marco Gonzales at St. Mark, and Msgr. Matthew Hendrick at St. Therese (which technically is just over the bridge in Wrightsville Beach). I could not ask for more outstanding men of God. I have been especially touched in different ways by all three men. Let me explain one of the many ways in which Father Dan touched me.

This last January I had gotten into a disagreement with a lay leader at St. Mark. Father Dan pointed out my error with both grace and dignity. I had to admit that in being so "right" I had become terribly wrong. That forced me to apologize in a manner of full disclosure without violating the anonymity or privacy of the other person. Father Dan stood up for Gospel principles and made me realize that it wasn't about my being right; it was about Jesus being right. So I had to suck in my pride and admit that I had screwed up again, and to ask for forgiveness. Of course I went that Saturday to Confession with Msgr. Matt at St. Therese. And I knew that before I entered that Confessional, I better have already made my amends for my screw up.

Holy men like that are very rare nowadays, and we have three of them in the Wilmington, NC area. We're losing one to our Bishop in Raleigh, but the Lord is still on the Throne, and whomever the Bishop appoints in Father Dan's stead will be he whom the Holy Spirit has directed our Bishop to select. We have to have Faith that all will be well.

Let us pray for God's blessings on Father Dan during the remainder of his tenure at St. Mark, and as he goes on to his new duties at Sacred Heart Cathedral. And most of all, let us give thanks that we have at least had Father Dan's leadership even if for only this short period of time.

Father Dan, may God richly bless you and may the Blessed Virgin Mary encircle her arms of protection around you.

In nomine Patris, et Filii et Spiritus Sancti, Amen!

Update - my letter to Bishop Burbidge at http://www.dioceseofraleigh.org/contact/.

Dear Bishop Burbidge,

I am very sad that you are taking Father Dan Oschwald away from us in Wilmington, NC to serve at Sacred Heart Cathedral. But I understand that you need the best of the best as Rector at Sacred Heart, and Father Dan is by far the best of the best. Please take time to read the entry I made about this at my blogsite at: http://commentarius-ioannis.blogspot.com/2009/04/father-dan-leaving-in-june-2009.html.
I know that the Holy Spirit will direct you to assign us in Wilmington the right replacement, but please know that Father Dan is loved greatly down here.

Regards,

Paul