I Apologize - I Made an Error

Folks,

I owe everyone an apology.

During the recent discussion on the opposition of the USCCB to the current form the Health Care bills winding their way through Congress, I assumed (based on a misleading hyperlink) that the church bulletin inserts were prepared and readied on October 23, 2009, and it was not until October 28, 2009 (five days later) that the Catholic Online internet news forum provided an article on the same, and not until October 30, 2009 that the Diocese of Raliegh acted on this.

The misleading hyperlink on which I based my false conclusions was HC Bulletin Insert 10-23-09 Final.pdf at http://www.catholic.org/politics/story.php?id=34735.

Notice the date "10-23-09" inserted into the URL.

Well, I was WRONG! Apparently the Diocese knew NOTHING about this USCCB announcement for bulletin inserts against Obamacare until the SAME date that the Catholic Online news agency published its article on the same. In fact, Bishop Burbidge of the Diocese of Raleigh kindly explained to me in an e-mail that he had Diocesan personnel work feverishly to ensure that ALL parishes in the Diocese were duly informed of the USCCB initiative.

Therefore, I apologize (especially to any Diocesan staff and the Bishop) for the inaccurate information. Mine was the error based on a misleading hyperlink at a news agency's web site. I should have done more research on the EXACT timing to avoid wrongful conclusions.

The Wheat and the Tares

Folks,

Sometimes on the way to or from work I listen to random readings of the Bible on CD ROM. Today I listened to James Earl Jones reading aloud Matthew 13:24-30 in the King James Version. Then coincidentally this evening I just happened to look in the Anglican Book of Common Prayer for today's Year One Daily Office Readings and sure enough, the Gospel Reading was Matthew 13:24-30. I have been told the coincidences like this are examples of God maintaining His anonymity.

I then considered my previous post, Liberal Catholics to ECUSA and Orthodox Anglicans to the RCC , on Thursday and realized that what Jesus Himself pointed out was quite different than what I had (albeit somewhat facetiously) recommended:

Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his field:
But while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went his way.
But when the blade was sprung up, and brought forth fruit, then appeared the tares also.
So the servants of the householder came and said unto him, Sir, didst not thou sow good seed in thy field? from whence then hath it tares?
He said unto them, An enemy hath done this. The servants said unto him, Wilt thou then that we go and gather them up?
But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them.
Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.

I mention this because earlier today I had thought (perhaps incorrectly) that a social-justice Catholic Religious person was obstructing the needful public dissemination of some important information. First, it's not up to me to judge whether that person is a wheat or a tare; rather, I had better ensure that I am a wheat and not a tare. Second, even if that person is a tare, dismissal from the Catholic Church into the liberal Episcopalian community (as I sarcastically advocated in the aforementioned post) would hardly be the right thing to do (though it may presently appeal to the less virtuous, more perverse streak in my unbalanced personality).

The Lord clearly indicates that the tares should not be uprooted lest in doing so the wheat is uprooted. Rather, we should let the Master of harvest do the differentiation. Our job is to be the wheat regardless.

By the way, I love the Roman Missal (of course). I love the Book of Common Prayer, too. I read both, and on Sundays and Holy Days they are very similar.

Alert from Bishops on Obamacare

Folks,

The following alert was sent from the Bishops of North Carolina on Obamacare (though they astutely avoided calling it that - I'm just not politically correct today, but that's no different than any other day):

October 30, 2009

Dear Catholic Voice North Carolina Participant:

The Catholic Bishops of the United States have issued an urgent Call to Action regarding the health care reform debate that is currently underway in the United States Congress. The Bishops have concluded that the three bills under consideration are seriously flawed in the following areas: 1) mandating the use of federal funds to pay for abortions (which is contrary to our current federal law), 2) forcing health care workers and Catholic medical institutions to perform medical procedures in violation of their religious conscience and 3) providing adequate access to health care for the poor and immigrants.We invite you to visit the Bishops' website that is dedicated to this issue and to contact your elected representatives as soon as possible. You can do so by going to the Bishops' website or by visiting your respective diocesan website.

Raleigh

Charlotte

Thank you

Catholic Voice North Carolina

Anti-Catholicism

Folks,

The following article was written by Archbishop Dolan as an opinion piece for publication in the NY Times. True to its liberal Democrat form, the NY Times denied publication. Thus, it is reprinted below from the good Archbishop's blogsite.

Anti-Catholicism
October 29, 2009

The following article was submitted in a slightly shorter form to the New York Times as an op-ed article. The Times declined to publish it. I thought you might be interested in reading it.

FOUL BALL!
By Archbishop Timothy M. Dolan
Archbishop of New York

October is the month we relish the highpoint of our national pastime, especially when one of our own New York teams is in the World Series!

Sadly, America has another national pastime, this one not pleasant at all: anti-catholicism.

It is not hyperbole to call prejudice against the Catholic Church a national pastime. Scholars such as Arthur Schlesinger Sr. referred to it as “the deepest bias in the history of the American people,” while John Higham described it as “the most luxuriant, tenacious tradition of paranoiac agitation in American history.” “The anti-semitism of the left,” is how Paul Viereck reads it, and Professor Philip Jenkins sub-titles his book on the topic “the last acceptable prejudice.”

If you want recent evidence of this unfairness against the Catholic Church, look no further than a few of these following examples of occurrences over the last couple weeks:

On October 14, in the pages of the New York Times, reporter Paul Vitello exposed the sad extent of child sexual abuse in Brooklyn’s Orthodox Jewish community. According to the article, there were forty cases of such abuse in this tiny community last year alone. Yet the Times did not demand what it has called for incessantly when addressing the same kind of abuse by a tiny minority of priests: release of names of abusers, rollback of statute of limitations, external investigations, release of all records, and total transparency. Instead, an attorney is quoted urging law enforcement officials to recognize “religious sensitivities,” and no criticism was offered of the DA’s office for allowing Orthodox rabbis to settle these cases “internally.” Given the Catholic Church’s own recent horrible experience, I am hardly in any position to criticize our Orthodox Jewish neighbors, and have no wish to do so . . . but I can criticize this kind of “selective outrage.”

Of course, this selective outrage probably should not surprise us at all, as we have seen many other examples of the phenomenon in recent years when it comes to the issue of sexual abuse. To cite but two: In 2004, Professor Carol Shakeshaft documented the wide-spread problem of sexual abuse of minors in our nation’s public schools (the study can be found here). In 2007, the Associated Press issued a series of investigative reports that also showed the numerous examples of sexual abuse by educators against public school students. Both the Shakeshaft study and the AP reports were essentially ignored, as papers such as the New York Times only seem to have priests in their crosshairs.

On October 16, Laurie Goodstein of the Times offered a front page, above-the-fold story on the sad episode of a Franciscan priest who had fathered a child. Even taking into account that the relationship with the mother was consensual and between two adults, and that the Franciscans have attempted to deal justly with the errant priest’s responsibilities to his son, this action is still sinful, scandalous, and indefensible. However, one still has to wonder why a quarter-century old story of a sin by a priest is now suddenly more pressing and newsworthy than the war in Afghanistan, health care, and starvation–genocide in Sudan. No other cleric from religions other than Catholic ever seems to merit such attention.

Five days later, October 21, the Times gave its major headline to the decision by the Vatican to welcome Anglicans who had requested union with Rome. Fair enough. Unfair, though, was the article’s observation that the Holy See lured and bid for the Anglicans. Of course, the reality is simply that for years thousands of Anglicans have been asking Rome to be accepted into the Catholic Church with a special sensitivity for their own tradition. As Cardinal Walter Kasper, the Vatican’s chief ecumenist, observed, “We are not fishing in the Anglican pond.” Not enough for the Times; for them, this was another case of the conniving Vatican luring and bidding unsuspecting, good people, greedily capitalizing on the current internal tensions in Anglicanism.

Finally, the most combustible example of all came Sunday with an intemperate and scurrilous piece by Maureen Dowd on the opinion pages of the Times. In a diatribe that rightly never would have passed muster with the editors had it so criticized an Islamic, Jewish, or African-American religious issue, she digs deep into the nativist handbook to use every anti-Catholic caricature possible, from the Inquisition to the Holocaust, condoms, obsession with sex, pedophile priests, and oppression of women, all the while slashing Pope Benedict XVI for his shoes, his forced conscription -- along with every other German teenage boy -- into the German army, his outreach to former Catholics, and his recent welcome to Anglicans.

True enough, the matter that triggered her spasm -- the current visitation of women religious by Vatican representatives -- is well-worth discussing, and hardly exempt from legitimate questioning. But her prejudice, while maybe appropriate for the Know-Nothing newspaper of the 1850’s, the Menace, has no place in a major publication today.

I do not mean to suggest that anti-catholicism is confined to the pages New York Times. Unfortunately, abundant examples can be found in many different venues. I will not even begin to try and list the many cases of anti-catholicism in the so-called entertainment media, as they are so prevalent they sometimes seem almost routine and obligatory. Elsewhere, last week, Representative Patrick Kennedy made some incredibly inaccurate and uncalled-for remarks concerning the Catholic bishops, as mentioned in this blog on Monday. Also, the New York State Legislature has levied a special payroll tax to help the Metropolitan Transportation Authority fund its deficit. This legislation calls for the public schools to be reimbursed the cost of the tax; Catholic schools, and other private schools, will not receive the reimbursement, costing each of the schools thousands – in some cases tens of thousands – of dollars, money that the parents and schools can hardly afford. (Nor can the archdiocese, which already underwrites the schools by $30 million annually.) Is it not an issue of basic fairness for ALL school-children and their parents to be treated equally?

The Catholic Church is not above criticism. We Catholics do a fair amount of it ourselves. We welcome and expect it. All we ask is that such critique be fair, rational, and accurate, what we would expect for anybody. The suspicion and bias against the Church is a national pastime that should be “rained out” for good.

I guess my own background in American history should caution me not to hold my breath.

Then again, yesterday was the Feast of Saint Jude, the patron saint of impossible causes.

Bishops Call for Opposition to Abortion in Health Care Reform

Folks,

The USCCB has come out definitively opposed the the current health care proposals winding their way through Congress and the White House due to their pro-abortion stance. Please see news announcement from Catholic Online:

Bishops Call for Unprecedented, Massive Catholic Opposition to Abortion in Current Health Care Reform

There will be a followup request from "official channels" to get the essential substance of this information into Church Bulletins and announced from the pulpit as the Bishops desire (http://www.usccb.org/healthcare/).

But I will remind everyone (just my two cents worth) that when we abdicate our God-given responsibility as members of the Body of Christ to feed the hungry, give drink to the thirsty, clothe the naked, care for the sick, welcome the alien and visit the imprisoned to either Ceasar Augustus or Caesar Obama, then we sacrifice on the altar of political expediency the freedom we have in Christ Jesus and His very Authority to secularism, atheist humanism and political insanity.

Repentance comes BEFORE social justice, NEVER afterwards, and as long as we murder over one million unborn babies each and every year (especially under the guise of "health care"), then as a nation we deserve neither social justice nor the common good.

Obama Signs Hate Crimes Bill Based on Gender, Sexual Orientation

Folks,

Newsmax reports that Obama Signs Hate Crimes Bill Based on Gender, Sexual Orientation. So now, when a Catholic priest or Evangelical minister preaches from Romans 1:18-32 or 1st Corinthians 6:9-10, that priest or minister can and will be accused of committing a hate crime.

Well guess what? God HATES sin - but He LOVES the sinner. People forget about Ezekiel 18 and John 3:16-18. Thus, we need to be reminded of what Ezekiel 18:23 states:

Do I indeed derive any pleasure from the death of the wicked? says the Lord GOD. Do I not rather rejoice when he turns from his evil way that he may live?

Let us remember here what the Catechism of the Catholic Church explicity points out in Articles 2357 through 2359:

Chastity and homosexuality

2357

Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered." They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.

2358

The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God's will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.

2359

Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.

I am a divorced heterosexual. The same rules apply to me as apply to a homosexual: no sex outside of the Sacrament of Holy Matrimony between one man and one woman. Furthermore, if one reads what Jesus pointed out in Matthew 19:1-12, then perhaps I should not be permitted to ever marry again (assuming that annulment is denied). Those are the consequences of what I have done in my life. That's the way it is. Jesus said, "Take up your cross and follow me." The homosexual person likewise has consequences to live with and a cross to bear, whether fair or unfair. (Jesus never complained that His Cross was unfair.)

Ezekiel 18:25-29 summarizes this best:

You say, "The LORD'S way is not fair!" Hear now, house of Israel: Is it my way that is unfair, or rather, are not your ways unfair? When a virtuous man turns away from virtue to commit iniquity, and dies, it is because of the iniquity he committed that he must die. But if a wicked man, turning from the wickedness he has committed, does what is right and just, he shall preserve his life; since he has turned away from all the sins which he committed, he shall surely live, he shall not die. And yet the house of Israel says, "The LORD'S way is not fair!" Is it my way that is not fair, house of Israel, or rather, is it not that your ways are not fair?

Liberal Catholics to ECUSA and Orthodox Anglicans to the RCC

Folks,

Pope Benedict XVI's overtures to orthodox Anglicans is a most welcome event. Of course, there are liberal Catholics whining about it, as well as liberal Anglicans and Episcopalians. The solution is simple: if you're a liberal nitwit who places the false gospel of social justice and the common good ahead of the true Gospel of the Passion, Crucifixion and Resurrection of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, then go join Episcopal Bishopress Schori's Rainbow Mitre collection of fruit cakes and nuts.














On the other hand, if you believe in what Holy Mother Church teaches and what Sacred Scripture says, then Pope Benedict XVI has a place for you.

Even More on CCHD

Folks,

The American Catholic blogsite has an entry today on the problems with the Catholic Campaign for Human Development:

Boycott Upcoming Catholic Campaign for Human Development Collection

It points to another web site called:

Reform the Catholic Campaign for Human Development

If the Faithful are going to be petitioned for donations this November, then the USCCB and its subsidiary Dioceses (including the Diocese of Raleigh) must repudiate CCHD for its involvment in the following, and provide positive measures to prevent future recurrence:

Funding Abortions.
Funding Same-Sex Marriage Initiatives.
Promoting Marxism.
Promoting and Participating in Violence.
Ties with Saul Alinsky, an anarchist and anti-American.
Promotes and Funds Prostitution.
Funds and Promotes Racism (La Raza).

I will say this again: there can be NO social justice, NO service to the common good unless and until we the people repent before the Lord God Almighty. Repentance comes BEFORE prosperity, NOT afterwards. Socialist initiatives (like those that CCHD has actively supported in the past) put the false gospel of social justice ahead of the true Gospel of Jesus Christ. It is about time that we stop putting the cart before the horse, and put the Cross of Jesus Christ front and center.

Read Your Bible!

Folks,

Today's General Audience with Pope Benedict XVI was refreshing:

Dear Brothers and Sisters,

In our catechesis on the Christian thinkers of the Middle Ages, we now turn to the renewal of theology in the wake of the Gregorian Reform. The twelfth century was a time of a spiritual, cultural and political rebirth in the West. Theology, for its part, became more conscious of its own nature and method, faced new problems and paved the way for the great theological masterpieces of the thirteenth century, the age of Saint Thomas Aquinas and Bonaventure. Two basic “models” of theology emerged, associated respectively with the monasteries and the schools which were the forerunners of the medieval universities. Monastic theology grew out of the prayerful contemplation of the Scriptures and the texts of the Church Fathers, stressing their interior unity and spiritual meaning, centred on the mystery of Christ. Scholastic theology sought to clarify the understanding of the faith by study of the sources and the use of logic, and led to the great works of synthesis known as the Summae. Even today this confidence in the harmony of faith and reason inspires us to account for the hope within us (cf. 1 Pet 3:15) and to show that faith liberates reason, enabling the human spirit to rise to the loving contemplation of that fullness of truth which is God himself.

As St. Jerome pointed out, "Ignorance of Scripture is ignorance of Christ."

Concering the USCCB’s Involvement against Conservative Talk Radio

Folks,

This subject was the point of the following blog post at American Catholic yesterday:

http://the-american-catholic.com/2009/10/27/usccb-caught-red-handed-archbishop-chaput-tap-dances-oh-joy/

What is surprising is Archbishop Chaput's excuses for the nonsense actions of a few in the USCCB. I do not understand this at all.

People should inform the USCCB of their thoughts concerning this at commdept@usccb.org.

UPDATE

The Department of Communications of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops has told the Catholic News Agency that it did NOT join a petition to the FCC which called for discussion over “hate speech” and its alleged role in violence:

http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=17495

However, the Department of Communications of the USCCB is a member of the “So We Might See Coalition”:

http://www.ucc.org/media-justice/mvf2009/about.html

This coalition did organize a letter to Federal Communications Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski to ask the FCC to open a “notice of inquiry into hate speech in the media” and to update a 1993 report on the role of telecommunications in hate crimes. This coalition is led by the United Church of Christ:

http://www.ucc.org/

Again, according to the Catholic News Agency (CAN), the USCCB Department of Communications did send an e-mail to CAN explaining that the USCCB had NOT joined the petition against Conservative Talk Radio organized by the “So We Might See Coalition”.

The reader should note that Barack Hussein Obama is a member of the United Church of Christ. According to Wikipedia, “He was baptized at the Trinity United Church of Christ in 1988 and was an active member there for two decades.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama

While it appears that the USCCB has NOT endorsed the recent attacks against Conservative Talk Radio, its relationship with the Marxist “So We Might See Coalition” is automatically suspect, especially given the relationship that pro-abortionist Obama has had with the UCC in the past.

The Bishops in the USCCB still do NOT understand that one cannot ally the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church with either heretical Protestant denominations (the UCC) or secular movements (“So We Might See Coalition”). We as the Body of Christ MUST remain pure. Indeed, the purpose of the Church is NOT to tell the FCC how to regulate communciations, but rather the Great Commission given in Matthew 28:19-20:

Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you.

We need to get our minds and attention off of pseudo-social justice issues and onto the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Babies are being murdered right and left, and men are doing with men abominable things in the sight of the Lord God Almighty, while teaching children to do the same. Meanwhile, we twitter away our time with whether or not Rush Limbaugh should be muzzled. For heaven’s sake, folks!

The Battle Between Good and Evil: an Update from Fr. Corapi

Folks,

I received the following in an e-mail from Father Corapi's web site:

The Battle Between Good and Evil: an Update from Fr. Corapi

As Halloween approaches, we are surrounded by themes of the occult, ghosts, demons, curses, and hauntings. Demonic and occult themes permeate the media at this time of year. Most of this material is pure fiction, yet the part that is not fiction is an acknowledgment that angels and demons exist.

One cannot understand reality if one brackets out a large portion of reality - the preternatural order (angels and demons). If you try to arrive at valid conclusions concerning reality, but have left out a good part of that reality you are engaged in an exercise in futility. So many things today can only be understood in the light of this spiritual reality. Have you ever wondered why so many apparently educated and intelligent people just don't get it, especially with respect to such life and death matters as abortion?

There is a battle that goes on in the spiritual order between the forces of God and the forces of Satan, "the adversary." This battle between cosmic good and evil, between angels and demons, has man caught in the crosshairs. Man is an active player in his own salvation. We need the help of our allies the angels. To fail to enlist their help is reckless. To fail to realize the reality of the enemy forces, the demonic legions, can be ultimately and eternally fatal.

We are at war and our battle is not against flesh and blood, as St. Paul warns us in Ephesians 6. The battle between good and evil, truth and lies, life and death involves these angelic legions - good and evil. We are soldiers in God's army, like it or not, believe it or not. We must be aware of these fundamental teachings, learn them, and live in accordance with them...

God bless you,

Fr. John Corapi

Hope

Folks,

Today's Liturgical Readings can be found at:

http://www.usccb.org/nab/readings/102709.shtml

The reading from Romans 8:18-25 is particularly instructive:

Brothers and sisters:
I consider that the sufferings of this present time are as nothing
compared with the glory to be revealed for us.
For creation awaits with eager expectation
the revelation of the children of God;
for creation was made subject to futility,
not of its own accord but because of the one who subjected it,
in hope that creation itself
would be set free from slavery to corruption
and share in the glorious freedom of the children of God.
We know that all creation is groaning in labor pains even until now;
and not only that, but we ourselves,
who have the firstfruits of the Spirit,
we also groan within ourselvesas we wait for adoption, the redemption of our bodies.
For in hope we were saved.
Now hope that sees for itself is not hope. For who hopes for what one sees?
But if we hope for what we do not see, we wait with endurance.

Father Powell's brief homily Choose to hope on today's Readings deserves the reader's careful consideration. I particularly found the last two paragraphs noteworthy:

Paul, writing to the Romans, asks: “. . .who hopes for what one sees?” We do not hope that the bus arrives on time when we see it arriving on time. We do not hope that our laptop will boot up when we see it booting up. Hoping for success when we see success in action is irrational. So, Paul adds, “But if we hope for what we do not see, we wait with endurance.” Notice here that he qualifies how we wait, “with endurance.” We do not hope, waiting impatiently, or angrily, for what we do not see. While we hope for what we do not see, we wait with strength, resolution; with guts and grit, with moxie and mettle. We dare failure to do its worst, and still we hope. But we must remember, lest we sound arrogant, we must remember: we do not hope in the works of our hands, or the words of our mouths; we hope in the marvelous deeds of the Lord, in His Word alone. It is only in the Kingdom of God that the mustard seed always grows, that the yeast always leavens. And only in His Kingdom that our failure might be counted as success.

Paul writes, “. . .in hope we were saved.” Saved from what? From whom? We are saved from despairing over our inevitable mistakes; from collapsing under the weight of temptation and sin; from suffering for the sake of suffering; we are saved from the one who would rejoice if we were to abandon eternal life for endless death; from the one who wishes us nothing but disorder, disease, insanity, and pain. The most marvelous deed that our Lord has done for us is to free us from all that binds us to the one who would kill us out of envy and spite. We are saved from his eternal failure. We are planted, watered, and fed so that all we can do is grow and thrive; all we can do is season and leaven this world. Therefore, choose to hope, or hopelessness will be chosen for you.

Reasons for Abortion

Update - 04/02/2011: please see http://commentarius-ioannis.blogspot.com/2011/04/todays-demonstration-at-abortion-mill.html

Folks,

The following chart on the statistics for the reasons women give for having abortions is from the USCCB's web page Contraceptive UseReasons for Abortion:

Let's summarize what this chart tells us.

Contrary to our liberal detractors who say abortion must remain legal for cases of rape and incest, the actual percentages of rape and incest given as reasons for abortion are less than one percent of all abortions.

25 percent of all women having abortions say that they are not ready for a child; yet they and the men with whom they slept were all too ready to have sexual intercourse.

23 percent claim that they cannot afford a child at the current time. Yet they and the men with whom they slept could afford to have sexual intercourse.

19 percent claim that they have completed their child-bearing years, yet apparently they and the men with whom they slept have not completed their years of sexual intercourse.

Eight percent claim they don't want to be a single mother, yet without the sanctity of Holy Matrimony they and the men with whom they slept felt no qualms about engaging in sexual intercourse.

Seven percent claim that they are not mature enough, yet they and the men with whom they slept were apparently mature enough to decide to engage in sexual intercourse.

I could go on, but won't. The bottom line is this: those who favor abortion want license without responsibility, sexual promiscuity without the consequences. And using rape or incest as an excuse is a red herring. Indeed, since when do two wrongs (rape or incest and murder of the unborn) make a right?

These numbers are very revealing. Basically, liberals (whether Democrat or Republican) are selfish little brats who want to do whatever feels good with no consequences whatsoever. I like how the King James Version translates Galatians 6:7 in this regard:

Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.

Said another way, this means TANSTAAFL:

There ain't no such thing as a free lunch.

Repent or Perish

Folks,

As most of you recall, on Saturday I made a blog entry entitled, "Obama Declares H1N1 Flu 'National Emergency'", the intent of which was to point out that unless we as a nation repent, we can expect more horrible things to result for our having forsaken the Lord God as our King. Needless to say, when this post was automatically copied to my Facebook account, it was read by an agnostic detractor who saw nothing but humorless ridicule in the the idea that God actually cares about this country and His people. The idea that God would allow people to reap what they have sown by their rejection of His love was to his well-educated and scientific mind ludicrous. Oh, when Jesus talks about loving one's neighbor or giving to the poor, this otherwise well-meaning individual is the first to publicly support such ideas. But when the logical converse is set forth - that God allows rebellious mankind to suffer the results of rejecting His love - all this gentleman could do was ridicule. It therefore would do well for us to recall what Jesus Himself said in Luke 13:1-5:

At that time some people who were present there told him [Jesus] about the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mingled with the blood of their sacrifices. He said to them in reply, "Do you think that because these Galileans suffered in this way they were greater sinners than all other Galileans? By no means! But I tell you, if you do not repent, you will all perish as they did! Or those eighteen people who were killed when the tower at Siloam fell on them--do you think they were more guilty than everyone else who lived in Jerusalem? By no means! But I tell you, if you do not repent, you will all perish as they did!"

Liberal Democrat nuns who volunteer at abortion clinics, Representative Patrick Kennedy slandering Holy Mother Church, and all the rest who think it's OK to defy God Almighty because human wisdom, human science, human engineering and human technology is so advanced would do well to remember that with but a swat of His mighty hand God can render all man's works for naught.

God doesn't want us to repent to make Himself look great. He doesn't need us to be great. God wants us to repent because He loves us so much that he gave His only begotten Son to us to die in our stead.

But implicit in that love is this principle: the humility of repentance always has to come first. Always. There will be no laughing in hell.

The Acton Institute

Folks,

I heartily recommend the following:

The Acton Institute web site for the study of religion and liberty
The Acton Institute Power Blog
The Stewardship Study Bible

True, these are all Protestant non-denominational resources; however, the clarity given to the subject of religion and liberty by the Acton Institute is without compare. At last there is a rational discussion that does NOT involve equating government-sponsored wealth redistributionism and other Marxist ideas about social justice and the common good with real Christian principles of personal freedom, responsibility and accountability before the Lord God Almighty.

Obama Declares H1N1 Flu 'National Emergency'

Folks,

As many of you may already know, Obama Declares H1N1 Flu 'National Emergency'.

"Since the beginning of the pandemic, we've seen more than 1,000 deaths and 20,000 hospitalizations," said Dr. Thomas Frieden, head of the CDC.

Of course, there is no causal relationship between this and the legitimatization of the infanticide of the unborn, or the promotion of relationships of sodomy as marriage.

Be sure of this, that no immoral or impure or greedy person, that is, an idolater, has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God. Let no one deceive you with empty arguments, for because of these things the wrath of God is coming upon the disobedient. So do not be associated with them. Ephesians 5:5-7

How Liberalism Fails the Church

Folks,

Cardinal Francis George produced an excellent article in November, 1999 entitled, "How Liberalism Fails the Church." Please read this and Father Powell's commentary on the same, "Simply Catholic: Cardinal George on the Liberal Project."

Rambles on Social Philosophy and Peace with Honor

Folks,

Dr. Pournelle has made an entry at his Chaos Manor blog site entitled, "Rambles on Social Philosophy and Peace with Honor". I encourage the interested reader to left click his mouse on the aforementioned web link for an education into the price of liberalism. I will remind the reader of exactly what Dr. Pournelle points out:

We have sent the Legions to Afghanistan and Iraq. They want to achieve the objectives we have given them. Bringing home a defeated army is never a good thing for a republic. We sent the troops, and we have no right to demand that they throw their honor on the ground as they withdraw.

It's never a good idea to withdraw the Legions back to the Motherland in dishonor, especially when they still have their weapons in hand. The American Congress is no better than the Roman Senate, full of laundry women arguing over whose clothes gets cleaned first. I can only hope the the wrath of the Legions is directed there towards.

Lots of News on Traditionalist Anglicans Coming into the Church

Folks,

There is a lot of news about Pope Benedict XVI's provisions for traditionalist Anglicans to be weclomed into the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church from the dictatorship of relativism and political correctness that currently plagues the Anglican and Episcopalian communities. One article is from the Catholic Online web site and is entitled:

Fr. Dwight Longenecker: 'A Bridge Across the Tiber'

As this man of God correctly points out, liberal Anglicanism is losing members all the time. Political correctness and mediocrity at any price just doesn't enthrall a people; so the liberal churches have vacant pews since their members really don't believe in Jesus Christ. Those Christian communities, however, which are growing (certain Protestant Pentecostal denominations, the ICCEC, etc.) are expanding because their clergy and their laity BELIEVE in the true Gospel of Jesus Christ, NOT the false gospel of the Obamination of Desolation: social justice for all except unborn babies and peace at any price, even if it means unbridled sodomy.

I truly like the last paragraph is Fr. Longenecker's essay:

Finally, what are the implications for the Catholic Church herself at the beginning of the new millennium? Not only is this Apostolic Constitution a rebuff to the old style of ecumenical discussions, it is a rebuff to liberal Catholics. The pope is giving a very clear message to those who wish to follow the historic Christian faith: "Let us be united in the One Faith, One Church, One Baptism." He is willing to take risks to welcome those who follow the historic Christian faith, although separated from full communion with Rome. On the other hand, he sees those who prefer the modern gospel of relativism, sexual license, and a denial of the historic Christian faith that have taken over the mainstream Protestant churches. He knows there are plenty of them in the Catholic Church, and to them Benedict is quietly saying, "There's the door."

And as far as I am concerned, all the liberal left wing Marxist faux Catholics can pick up their bags and join Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori of the Episcopal church in mutual apostasy. The United States is a free country (Obama hasn't been able to destroy that yet), but the Catholic Church is NOT a democracy - Jesus Christ came to establish a Kingdom. Either serve and obey, or leave.

More Humor

Folks,

This is great, especially for all of you in recovery!

Today's Humor

Folks,

Here is today's humor:

NOTE ON ANGLICANS WISHING TO ENTER THE CATHOLIC CHURCH

NOTE ON ANGLICANS WISHING TO ENTER THE CATHOLIC CHURCH

VATICAN CITY, 20 OCT 2009 (VIS) - In a meeting with journalists held this morning in the Holy See Press Office Cardinal William Joseph Levada, prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, and Archbishop Joseph Augustine Di Noia O.P., secretary of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, presented a note on a new measure concerning "Personal Ordinariates for Anglicans entering the Catholic Church".

Commenting on the English-language note, which has been published by his dicastery, Cardinal Levada explained how, "with the preparation of an Apostolic Constitution, the Catholic Church is responding to the many requests that have been submitted to the Holy See from groups of Anglican clergy and faithful in different parts of the world who wish to enter into full visible communion.

"In this Apostolic Constitution the Holy Father has introduced a canonical structure that provides for such corporate reunion by establishing Personal Ordinariates, which will allow former Anglicans to enter full communion with the Catholic Church while preserving elements of the distinctive Anglican spiritual and liturgical patrimony. Under the terms of the Apostolic Constitution, pastoral oversight and guidance will be provided for groups of former Anglicans through a Personal Ordinariate, whose Ordinary will usually be appointed from among former Anglican clergy.

"The forthcoming Apostolic Constitution provides a reasonable and even necessary response to a worldwide phenomenon, by offering a single canonical model for the universal Church which is adaptable to various local situations and equitable to former Anglicans in its universal application. It provides for the ordination as Catholic priests of married former Anglican clergy. Historical and ecumenical reasons preclude the ordination of married men as bishops in both the Catholic and Orthodox Churches. The Constitution therefore stipulates that the Ordinary can be either a priest or an unmarried bishop. The seminarians in the Ordinariate are to be prepared alongside other Catholic seminarians, though the Ordinariate may establish a house of formation to address the particular needs of formation in the Anglican patrimony".

"The provision of this new structure is consistent with the commitment to ecumenical dialogue, which continues to be a priority for the Catholic Church, particularly through the efforts of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity. The initiative has come from a number of different groups of Anglicans" who, said Cardinal Levada, "have declared that they share the common Catholic faith as it is expressed in the Catechism of the Catholic Church and accept the Petrine ministry as something Christ willed for the Church. For them, the time has come to express this implicit unity in the visible form of full communion".

The cardinal further indicated that "it is the hope of the Holy Father Benedict XVI that the Anglican clergy and faithful who desire union with the Catholic Church will find in this canonical structure the opportunity to preserve those Anglican traditions precious to them and consistent with the Catholic faith. Insofar as these traditions express in a distinctive way the faith that is held in common, they are a gift to be shared in the wider Church. The unity of the Church does not require a uniformity that ignores cultural diversity, as the history of Christianity shows. Moreover, the many diverse traditions present in the Catholic Church today are all rooted in the principle articulated by St. Paul in his letter to the Ephesians: 'There is one Lord, one faith, one baptism'.

"Our communion", the cardinal added in conclusion, "is therefore strengthened by such legitimate diversity, and so we are happy that these men and women bring with them their particular contributions to our common life of faith".

In a joint declaration on the same subject, Catholic Archbishop Vincent Gerard Nichols of Westminster and Anglican Archbishop Rowan Williams of Canterbury affirm that the announcement of the Apostolic Constitution "brings to an end a period of uncertainty for such groups who have nurtured hopes of new ways of embracing unity with the Catholic Church. It will now be up to those who have made requests to the Holy See to respond to the Apostolic Constitution", which is a "consequence of ecumenical dialogue between the Catholic Church and the Anglican Communion.

"The on-going official dialogue between the Catholic Church and the Anglican Communion provides the basis for our continuing co-operation", the declaration adds. "The Anglican Roman Catholic International Commission (ARCIC) and International Anglican Roman Catholic Commission for Unity and Mission (IARCCUM) agreements make clear the path we will follow together.

"With God's grace and prayer we are determined that our on-going mutual commitment and consultation on these and other matters should continue to be strengthened. Locally, in the spirit of IARCCUM, we look forward to building on the pattern of shared meetings between the Catholic Bishops Conference of England and Wales and the Church of England's House of Bishops with a focus on our common mission". CDF/ANGLICANS CATHOLICS/LEVADAVIS 091020 (820)

Pope Announces Plan for Anglicans to Convert En Masse

Folks,

There is an article entitled Pope Announces Plan for Anglicans to Convert En Masse at the UK Telegraph that is a cause for great joy. Many traditional Anglicans, holding fast to the Faith of their Fathers and the commandments of Scripture, are rejecting the pro-abortion, pro-gay marriage, pro-woman priesthood idolatry of the Anglican and Episcopalian communities, and will be allowed to rejoin with the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church under the Seat of St. Peter.

I truly hope that the "Most Rev." Dr. Katharine Jefferts Schori, presiding "Bishop" of the Episcopal Church in the United States, sits up and takes notice.

Greed

Folks,

Today's Gospel Reading is from Luke 12:13-21, the first part of which states:

Someone in the crowd said to Jesus,
“Teacher, tell my brother to share the inheritance with me.”
He replied to him,
“Friend, who appointed me as your judge and arbitrator?”
Then he said to the crowd,
“Take care to guard against all greed,
for though one may be rich,
one’s life does not consist of possessions.”

Today we have a government that ingratiates itself with those who cry, "Tell my brother to share the inheritance with me." Those who have inherited or earned their wealth are made to look both greedy and evil by the very fact of holding wealth that is rightfully theirs. Yet who in this story in the Gospel of Luke was really greedy? The man who inherited wealth or the man demanding he have a share in what was not given to him to begin with? Let us therefore remember that the cry for "social justice and the common good" is nothing but a cry for the satiation of greed. As St. Paul states 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.

Quote of the Evening

Folks,

This evening's quote is from Pope Leo XIII's Encyclical, Aeterni Patris, written in August, 1879:

Whoso turns his attention to the bitter strifes of these days and seeks a reason for the troubles that vex public and private life must come to the conclusion that a fruitful cause of the evils which now afflict, as well as those which threaten, us lies in this: that false conclusions concerning divine and human things, which originated in the schools of philosophy, have now crept into all the orders of the State, and have been accepted by the common consent of the masses.

We see here then the reason why democracies always fail, degenerating into socialist states: false conclusions concerning divine and human things...have been accepted by the common consent of the masses. Pope Leo XIII goes on to state:

We know that there are some who, in their overestimate of the human faculties, maintain that as soon as man's intellect becomes subject to divine authority it falls from its native dignity, and hampered by the yoke of this species of slavery, is much retarded and hindered in its progress toward the supreme truth and excellence. Such an idea is most false and deceptive, and its sole tendency is to induce foolish and ungrateful men wilfully to repudiate the most sublime truths, and reject the divine gift of faith, from which the fountains of all good things flow out upon civil society. For the human mind, being confined within certain limits, and those narrow enough, is exposed to many errors and is ignorant of many things; whereas the Christian faith, reposing on the authority of God, is the unfailing mistress of truth, whom whoso followeth he will be neither enmeshed in the snares of error nor tossed hither and thither on the waves of fluctuating opinion.

Could anything be truer of modern atheist humanism? But let the gentle reader study all of what Pope Leo XIII writes. Just left-click your mouse cursor on the aforementioned web link:

Aeterni Patris

Humor - Toddlers

Folks,

Here's some more humor. I can empathize with Daddy tiger! It's enough to drive a sane man stark raving mad! (But I still love my kids!)

Clarification on a Recent Post

Folks,

A person submitted a comment to this blogsite, Commentarius de Prognosticis, on a recent previous entry entitled L'Osservatore Romano on Obama's Peace Prize. My entry was critical of how a Vatican newspaper characterized the United States. However, the reader should not misconstrue criticism of an editorial in a newspaper as criticism of either the Vatican itself or our Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI. Apparently this reader misinterpreted the post and responded to it with a lengthy diatribe against any and all things Vatican or Papal. That comment submission was therefore rejected.

One can criticize the Catholic Church without recourse to diatribe, slander and wicked fantasy. Intelligent, rational comments will always be published here. But comment submissions that consitutute diatribe, slander and wicked fantasy against ANY religious denomination (Catholic, Orthodox, Protestant, Mormon or Jewish) will be rejected. As for Islam, the violent rhetoric inherent in the Koran and the behavior of its own terrorist adherents sadly make it an all too easy target of criticism; but even Muslims should and must be granted the respect and due consideration that any thinking, intelligent, sentient person would deserve.

As for liberal Democrats who call themselves "Catholic" or "Christian" while supporting abortion, gay marriage and all manner of pernicious filth, dirt and sexual perversion, and their atheist humanist comrades, they have placed themselves in a unique league of rebellion against morality and apostasy for which there is no excuse. Like their spiritual brothers the Islamic terrorists, they are without defense. That being said, diatribe, slander and wicked fantasy are unbecoming of us Christians united in opposition to godless secularism. We have to be a better example than they pretend to be; otherwise we become as wicked as they.

So in a word, comments that ridicule Latin American immigrants, that make fun of Mormons, that belittle the devout Jew, that promote anti-Semitism, etc., won't make it through moderation.

Humor - Wet Cat and a Gun

Folks,

This hero has the ultimate protection: a wet cat with 20 switchblades and a gun.

God's Hands?

Folks,

I wonder if this is what it means to leave things in God's Hands?

Address of the Holy Father to the US Ambassador to the Vatican

Folks,

What follows is the Address of Pope Benedict XVI to the New US Ambassador to the Vatican. The Holy Father's statements on respect for life are highlighted in red underlined font at this blog site, but may not appear in red on Facebook, but the underlining should be readily apparent.

ADDRESS OF HIS HOLINESS BENEDICT XVI TO HIS EXCELLENCY Mr. MIGUEL HUMBERTO DÍASNEW AMBASSADOR OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICATO THE HOLY SEE

Apostolic Palace, Castel Gandolfo
Friday, 2 October 2009

Your Excellency,

I am pleased to accept the Letters by which you are accredited Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United States of America. I recall with pleasure my meeting with President Barack Obama and his family last July, and willingly reciprocate the kind greetings which you bring from him. I also take this occasion to express my confidence that diplomatic relations between the United States and the Holy See, formally initiated twenty-five years ago, will continue to be marked by fruitful dialogue and cooperation in the promotion of human dignity, respect for fundamental human rights, and the service of justice, solidarity and peace within the whole human family.

In the course of my Pastoral Visit to your country last year I was pleased to encounter a vibrant democracy, committed to the service of the common good and shaped by a vision of equality and equal opportunity based on the God-given dignity and freedom of each human being. That vision, enshrined in the nation’s founding documents, continues to inspire the growth of the United States as a cohesive yet pluralistic society constantly enriched by the gifts brought by new generations, including the many immigrants who continue to enhance and rejuvenate American society. In recent months, the reaffirmation of this dialectic of tradition and originality, unity and diversity has recaptured the imagination of the world, many of whose peoples look to the American experience and its founding vision in their own search for viable models of accountable democracy and sound development in an increasingly interdependent and global society.

For this reason, I appreciate your acknowledgement of the need for a greater spirit of solidarity and multilateral engagement in approaching the urgent problems facing our planet. The cultivation of the values of “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” can no longer be seen in predominantly individualistic or even national terms, but must rather be viewed from the higher perspective of the common good of the whole human family. The continuing international economic crisis clearly calls for a revision of present political, economic and financial structures in the light of the ethical imperative of ensuring the integral development of all people. What is needed, in effect, is a model of globalization inspired by an authentic humanism, in which the world’s peoples are seen not merely as neighbors but as brothers and sisters.

Multilateralism, for its part, should not be restricted to purely economic and political questions; rather, it should find expression in a resolve to address the whole spectrum of issues linked to the future of humanity and the promotion of human dignity, including secure access to food and water, basic health care, just policies governing commerce and immigration, particularly where families are concerned, climate control and care for the environment, and the elimination of the scourge of nuclear weapons. With regard to the latter issue, I wish to express my satisfaction for the recent Meeting of the United Nations Security Council chaired by President Obama, which unanimously approved the resolution on atomic disarmament and set before the international community the goal of a world free of nuclear weapons. This is a promising sign on the eve of the Review Conference of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.

Genuine progress, as the Church’s social teaching insists, must be integral and humane; it cannot prescind from the truth about human beings and must always be directed to their authentic good. In a word, fidelity to man requires fidelity to the truth, which alone is the guarantee of freedom and real development. For her part the Church in the United States wishes to contribute to the discussion of the weighty ethical and social questions shaping America’s future by proposing respectful and reasonable arguments grounded in the natural law and confirmed by the perspective of faith. Religious vision and religious imagination do not straiten but enrich political and ethical discourse, and the religions, precisely because they deal with the ultimate destiny of every man and woman, are called to be a prophetic force for human liberation and development throughout the world, particularly in areas torn by hostility and conflict. In my recent visit to the Holy Land I stressed the value of understanding and cooperation among the followers of the various religions in the service of peace, and so I note with appreciation your government’s desire to promote such cooperation as part of a broader dialogue between cultures and peoples.

Allow me, Mr. Ambassador, to reaffirm a conviction which I expressed at the outset of my Apostolic Journey to the United States. Freedom – the freedom which Americans rightly hold dear – “is not only a gift but also a summons to personal responsibility;” it is “a challenge held out to each generation, and it must constantly be won over to the cause of good” (Address at the White House, 16 April 2008). The preservation of freedom is inseparably linked to respect for truth and the pursuit of authentic human flourishing. The crisis of our modern democracies calls for a renewed commitment to reasoned dialogue in the discernment of wise and just policies respectful of human nature and human dignity. The Church in the United States contributes to this discernment particularly through the formation of consciences and her educational apostolate, by which she makes a significant and positive contribution to American civic life and public discourse. Here I think particularly of the need for a clear discernment with regard to issues touching the protection of human dignity and respect for the inalienable right to life from the moment of conception to natural death, as well as the protection of the right to conscientious objection on the part of health care workers, and indeed all citizens. The Church insists on the unbreakable link between an ethics of life and every other aspect of social ethics, for she is convinced that, in the prophetic words of the late Pope John Paul II, “a society lacks solid foundations when, on the one hand, it asserts values such as the dignity of the person, justice and peace, but then, on the other hand, radically acts to the contrary by allowing or tolerating a variety of ways in which human life is devalued and violated, especially where it is weak or marginalized” (Evangelium Vitae, 93; cf. Caritas in Veritate, 15).

Mr. Ambassador, as you undertake your new mission in the service of your country I offer you my good wishes and the promise of my prayers. Be assured that you may always count on the offices of the Holy See to assist and support you in the fulfillment of your duties. Upon you and your family, and upon all the beloved American people, I cordially invoke God’s blessings of wisdom, strength and peace.

Some Zen Buddhist Thoughts for the Day

Folks,

I have a great admiration for Zen Buddhism and Taoism. Of course, these religions or philosophies are not THE Truth, but there are many inspirational stories within their traditions. Eleven of those follow. Number five, which I first read years and years ago, is perhaps my favorite. Whenever I read this one, I am reminded of what Jesus would want us to do - exactly what Zen Master Hakuin did do.

1. A Cup of Tea

Nan-in, a Japanese master during the Meiji era (1868-1912), received a university professor who came to inquire about Zen.

Nan-in served tea. He poured his visitor’s cup full, and then kept on pouring.

The professor watched the overflow until he no longer could restrain himself. "It is overfull. No more will go in!"

"Like this cup," Nan-in said, "you are full of your own opinions and speculations. How can I show you Zen unless you first empty your cup?"

2. The Burden

Two monks were returning to the monastery in the evening. It had rained and there were puddles of water on the road sides. At one place a beautiful young woman was standing unable to walk accross because of a puddle of water. The elder of the two monks went up to a her lifted her and left her on the other side of the road, and continued his way to the monastery.
In the evening the younger monk came to the elder monk and said, "Sir, as monks, we cannot touch a woman ?"

The elder monk answered "yes, brother".

Then the younger monk asks again, "but then Sir, how is that you lifted that woman on the roadside ?"

The elder monk smiled at him and told him " I left her on the other side of the road, but you are still carrying her."

3. Finding a Piece of the Truth

One day Mara, the Evil One, was travelling through the villages of India with his attendants. he saw a man doing walking meditation whose face was lit up on wonder. The man had just discovered something on the ground in front of him. Mara’s attendant asked what that was and Mara replied, "A piece of truth."

"Doesn’t this bother you when someone finds a piece of truth, O Evil One?" his attendant asked.

"No," Mara replied. "Right after this, they usually make a belief out of it."

4. The Other Side

One day a young Buddhist on his journey home came to the banks of a wide river. Staring hopelessly at the great obstacle in front of him, he pondered for hours on just how to cross such a wide barrier. Just as he was about to give up his pursuit to continue his journey he saw a great teacher on the other side of the river. The young Buddhist yells over to the teacher, "Oh wise one, can you tell me how to get to the other side of this river"?

The teacher ponders for a moment looks up and down the river and yells back, "My son, you are on the other side".

5. Is That So?

The Zen Master Hakuin was praised by his neighbors as one living a pure life.

A beautiful Japanese girl whose parents owned a food store lived near him. Suddenly, without any warning, her parents discovered she was with child.

This made her parents very angry. She would not confess who the man was, but after much harassment at last named Hakuin.

In great anger the parents went to the master. "Is that so?" was all he would say.

When the child was born, the parents brought it to the Hakuin, who now was viewed as a pariah by the whole village. They demanded that he take care of the child since it was his responsibility. “Is that so?” Hakuin said calmly as he accepted the child.

A year later the girl-mother could stand it no longer. She told her parents the truth – that the real father of the child was a young man who worked in the fishmarket.

The mother and father of the girl at once went to Hakuin to ask his forgiveness, to apologize at length, and to get the child back again.

Hakuin was willing. In yielding the child, all he said was: "Is that so?"

6. Maybe

Once upon the time there was an old farmer who had worked his crops for many years. One day his horse ran away. Upon hearing the news, his neighbors came to visit. “Such bad luck,” they said sympathetically.

“Maybe,” the farmer replied.

The next morning the horse returned, bringing with it three other wild horses. “How wonderful,” the neighbors exclaimed.

“Maybe,” replied the old man.

The following day, his son tried to ride one of the untamed horses, was thrown, and broke his leg. The neighbors again came to offer their sympathy on his misfortune.

“Maybe,” answered the farmer.

The day after, military officials came to the village to draft young men into the army. Seeing that the son’s leg was broken, they passed him by. The neighbors congratulated the farmer on how well things had turned out.

“Maybe,” said the farmer.

7. Cliffhanger

One day while walking through the wilderness a man stumbled upon a vicious tiger. He ran but soon came to the edge of a high cliff. Desperate to save himself, he climbed down a vine and dangled over the fatal precipice.

As he hung there, two mice appeared from a hole in the cliff and began gnawing on the vine.
Suddenly, he noticed on the vine a plump wild strawberry. He plucked it and popped it in his mouth. It was incredibly delicious!

8. The Blind Men and the Elephant

Several citizens ran into a hot argument about God and different religions, and each one could not agree to a common answer. So they came to the Lord Buddha to find out what exactly God looks like.

The Buddha asked his disciples to get a large magnificent elephant and four blind men. He then brought the four blind to the elephant and told them to find out what the elephant would "look" like.

The first blind men touched the elephant leg and reported that it "looked" like a pillar. The second blind man touched the elephant tummy and said that an elephant was a wall. The third blind man touched the elephant ear and said that it was a piece of cloth. The fourth blind man hold on to the tail and described the elephant as a piece of rope. And all of them ran into a hot argument about the "appearance" of an elephant.

The Buddha asked the citizens: "Each blind man had touched the elephant but each of them gives a different description of the animal. Which answer is right?"

9. Right and Wrong

When Bankei held his seclusion-weeks of meditation, pupils from many parts of Japan came to attend. During one of these gatherings a pupil was caught stealing. The matter was reported to Bankei with the request that the culprit be expelled. Bankei ignored the case.

Later the pupil was caught in a similar act, and again Bankei disregarded the matter. This angered the other pupils, who drew up a petition asking for the dismissal of the thief, stating that otherwise they would leave in a body.

When Bankei had read the petition he called everyone before him. "You are wise brothers," he told them. "You know what is right and what is not right. You may go somewhere else to study if you wish, but this poor brother does not even know right from wrong. Who will teach him if I do not? I am going to keep him here even if all the rest of you leave."

A torrent of tears cleansed the face of the brother who had stolen. All desire to steal had vanished.

10. Nothing Exists

Yamaoka Tesshu, as a young student of Zen, visited one master after another. He called upon Dokuon of Shokoku.

Desiring to show his attainment, he said: "The mind, Buddha, and sentient beings, after all, do not exist. The true nature of phenomena is emptiness. There is no realization, no delusion, no sage, no mediocrity. There is no giving and nothing to be received."

Dokuon, who was smoking quietly, said nothing. Suddenly he whacked Yamaoka with his bamboo pipe. This made the youth quite angry.

"If nothing exists," inquired Dokuon, "where did this anger come from?"

11. Teaching the Ultimate

In early times in Japan, bamboo-and-paper lanterns were used with candles inside. A blind man, visiting a friend one night, was offered a lantern to carry home with him.

"I do not need a lantern," he said. "Darkness or light is all the same to me."

"I know you do not need a lantern to find your way," his friend replied, "but if you don’t have one, someone else may run into you. So you must take it."

The blind man started off with the lantern and before he had walked very far someone ran squarely into him. "Look out where you are going!" he exclaimed to the stranger. "Can’t you see this lantern?"

"Your candle has burned out, brother," replied the stranger.

L'Osservatore Romano on Obama's Peace Prize

Folks,

L'Osservatore Romano is the news publication from the Vatican. Its October 14th publication has an interesting short essay on the awarding of the Noble Peace Prize to Barack Hussein Obama. This essay is reprinted below. I note with irony the last sentence in this essay:

Yet at the same time, as the Director of the Holy See Press Office declared, we cannot but rejoice at seeing President Obama's efforts for nuclear disarmament recognized, along with his indisputable personal propensity for a policy oriented to obtaining peace rather than to affirming American power in the world.

There seems to be a complete lack of understanding that by God's grace it was American power which saved the Vatican from Mussolini and liberated Italy during WWII, and it was American power that made the Soviets over reach themselves during the Cold War, resulting in the liberation of Pope John Paul II's native land, Poland, as well as the rest of Eastern Europe, thereby allowing the Church to now flourish in what had once been communist bad lands.

How short people's memories are! Personally, I think George W. Bush deserves recongition in having brought the battle back to the Islamic fascists who started it. But then again, I never was a part of the herd of swine that blindly jumps off the cliff into the sea. Other than that, the essay is fine.

On President Obama's Nobel
A demanding prize
Lucetta Scaraffia

The decision to award the Nobel Peace Prize to Barack Obama took everyone more or less by surprise, first and foremost the President of the United States himself.

In fact in the past 90 years the Prize has never been awarded to an American President in office, fatally involved in political affairs, hence liable to take decisions contrary to peace. When Jimmy Carter won it in 2002, he had completed his mandate some years earlier. For this very reason commentators have been almost unanimous in describing the award as a way of pressuring Obama to favour pacifist decisions for the rest of his mandate.

Moreover, on the basis of the decisions he has made so far, it would be difficult to describe the President as an outright pacifist. His provisions regarding American military involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan seem to fall between fidelity to the pacifist principles proclaimed during his electoral campaign and a more realistic policy, which some have even defined as a continuation of the "warmongering" Bush. The American President's is an oscillating policy, similar to his policy for the important bioethical issues and in the first place, abortion, which has sparked so many disputes among Catholics in the U.S.

In receiving the sought-after recognition, Obama must remember that in 1979 he was preceded by Mother Teresa of Calcutta, who, in her official declaration on the occasion of the presentation of the Prize, had the courage to recall that the most destructive war, with the greatest number of "fallen", is the practice of abortion, legalized and facilitated even in international structures.

Yet with the prospect of influencing the future of Obama's presidential mandate, all the perplexities that invalidated the most authoritative nominations melted away.

An example is the nomination of John Paul II, proposed for years and a candidate since 1999 (when the Nobel Prize was awarded instead to Médecins sans Frontières) and especially in 2003, when he was considered a top favourite after his condemnation of the war in Iraq. In that year, many initiatives and a large part of the world seemed to be in favour of choosing him as the natural winner of the coveted Prize, and he was even considered the favourite by the bookmakers.

However, the Committee appointed by the Norwegian Parliament established by Alfred Nobel to select the meritorious candidates did not choose him but preferred the Iranian jurist Shirin Ebadi.

Pope Wojtya was considered by the members of the jury to be too conservative in other areas and it was feared that by rewarding, with him, the Catholic Church, it would show favouritism to an important religious denomination at the expense of others.

Such fears have apparently been surmounted in the much more controversial case of the award given to Obama.

The Nobel Peace Prize has once again given rise to perplexity and criticism, since the criteria for its designation often seem to have been influenced by politically correct thinking. Yet at the same time, as the Director of the Holy See Press Office declared, we cannot but rejoice at seeing President Obama's efforts for nuclear disarmament recognized, along with his indisputable personal propensity for a policy oriented to obtaining peace rather than to affirming American power in the world.

Amazing Grace in the Coliseum

Folks,

You may watch and hear the four tenors of the musical group Il Divo singing Amazing Grace within the Roman Coliseum at the following web link:

http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid1785324681?bclid=1338935106&bctid=1913313052

As you watch and listen to this, recall within your mind all the Christian martyrs within this ancient building who gave their lives for Jesus Christ rather than bow to Caesar. Imagine St. Ignatius of Antioch listening to this song. Recall the words he wrote to the early Church before he was murdered in the Coliseum:

I am writing to all the Churches and I enjoin all, that I am dying willingly for God's sake, if only you do not prevent it. I beg you, do not do me an untimely kindness. Allow me to be eaten by the beasts, which are my way of reaching to God. I am God's wheat, and I am to be ground by the teeth of wild beasts, so that I may become the pure bread of Christ.

Hebrews 12:4 is quite applicable to us in Western countries:

In your struggle against sin, you have not yet resisted to the point of shedding your blood.

As a result, we all too often take God's Amazing Grace for granted. St. Ignatius didn't, however.

More on the Noble Peace Prize

Folks,

Cardinal George has given a few words on President Obama receiving the Noble peace prize:

President Of U. S. Bishops’ Conference Congratulates President Obama For Nobel Peace Prize

It is double messages like this from the USCCB that confuse the Faithful.

President Obama wages a relentless war on the unborn as some sort of "right to choose". He legitimatizes sodomy as an inherent right for equal marriage. He advances fatal experimentation on unborn babies as medical technological progress, thereby sanitizing outright torture and murder with the words, "embryonic stem cell research." He promotes euthanasia as "end-of-life" counselling for the terminally ill and the aged.

So why does Cardinal George think President Obama merits the Noble Peace Prize?

"...the prize was given because as President of the United States he has already changed the international conversation."

This is a true statement. President Obama has ingratiated himself with the Islamic fascists of the Middle East and has allied himself with the atheist humanists of Europe. He is emasculating US military defense by cancelling anti-ballistic missile defenses in Eastern Europe and he is about to release scores of dangerous Muslim terrorists from the Guantanamo Bay Prison. Thus, this is called a change in the international conversation.

It is, however, a change that NO Catholic serving in the Naval Fleets against the Ottoman Sultan in 1571 would ever support, nor is it a change that then Pope Pius V would find worthy of positive recognition. Remember that Europe was in a three-way struggle between the Church, the Protestant Heresies and Islamic Fascism in the 1500s. In the same way today the world itself is in a three-way struggle between Christendom, Atheist Humanism and Islamic Fascism. It's about time we decide what side we are on. I for one am NOT on Obama's side.

Sadly, however, there is a vast undercurrent in the Church that believes in peace at any price, and that the works of mere mortal man can acheive lasting social justice for the common good. They believe that we can somehow make peace with the Muslim terrorists, and that we can come to a common understanding with the godless atheists. Such thoughts are nothing other than idolatrous hubris. The fact of the matter is that as long as our President rejects God Almighty, as long as our nation remains corrupted by the putrid filth, dirt and perversion of sodomy, adultery, fornication, baby-murdering, etc., there will be NO peace and NO social justice because we do NOT deserve any.

More on Health Care "Reform"

Folks,

The USCCB does not support the current incantation of the Health Care Bill going through Congress:

U.S. Bishops: Current Health Care Bills Violate Essential Principles; Will Seek Changes Or Have To Oppose

Pennsylvania bishops oppose current health care reform legislation

But Dr. Pournelle's little essay, Health Care Bill emerges, says it all:

Apparently we have a health care bill to debate. The details aren't clear.

Meanwhile radio commentators begin with the premise that everyone has a fundamental right to have someone else pay for their health care costs, just as everyone has a fundamental right to have someone else pay for their children's education. The result is a school system that is, perhaps, less than optimal. What the result of applying that principle to health care will be is not so obvious.

Examples of what's wrong with the system: middle aged unemployed professional woman with no health insurance has a bad moment and believes she may have had a minor stroke. Goes to the local hospital, where she is put under observation for a day, and given an aspirin tablet (or she may have taken the aspirin before going there). There may have been an MRI or X-ray; I'm not clear on that, but there is no other treatment and no other prescription. The bill comes to $2200. The explanation is that she has to pay more so they can provide treatment to those who can't pay at all. This is a clear indication that our system is broken. In another case I am familiar with a sixtyish life long smoker, unemployed, ends up in intensive care and gets a heart bypass operation. The bill was about $200,000 which his family (his wife is an employed elementary school teacher but her health care insurance apparently didn't cover her husband's heart condition, probably because of pre-existing conditions) couldn't pay. She was able to get the hospital to drop the charges down to something under $20,000, and they're paying on that in bits. No one knows what the cost really was, of course; the first bill reflected what the hospital mistakenly thought it could get. I have no idea of what relationship the final bill had to actual costs.

The question is, are those cases and others like them both severe enough and common enough to justify fundamental changes in about a sixth of the national economy? That is, perhaps the system is broken but is it so broken that it needs this drastic form of fixing? And if so, what fix? Because the one fix we now will not happen is some modification of the malpractice laws and the tort system. That simple will not happen. There are several other sacred cows that will not be touched no matter what changes are made in the system. That's simple politics. So: given that some of the obvious fixes are impossible, and will not happen, is the system so broke that it needs a fundamental revision that will not make the obvious fixes like tort reform?

Next question: apparently Tennessee and Massachusetts adopted variants of the Obama plan a few years ago. Are they working out well? One major criticism of the present system is that we spend far more on health care than anyone else; are we getting our money's worth? Obvious query: have costs gone down in Tennessee and Massachusetts?

And I ask, again, the obvious: where did your obligation to pay for someone else's health care come from? Under what principle is this to be done? The pragmatic argument is that it will save money if everyone is put under a health care plan, and preventive medicine will save huge amounts. I doubt that those who say this believe it; certainly few others do. We don't need health care reform to put a tax on sugar pop or even to end the sugar protections and subsidies; is that likely? Is there any evidence that preventive medicine applied to an entire population lowers health care costs? Depends, of course, on the preventions: cleaning up toxic wells and providing clean water certainly works. Does exhorting people to lose weight do it? If so, on which audience do the exhortations work?

These are all obvious questions, but I haven't heard them being addressed by those experts who are about to rebuild the health care system in these United States. And I haven't yet heard what the new bill will cost me, but it certainly will cost me something since it curbs Medicare Advantage. Given what Social Security took from me (and still takes) over the years, I would have thought I had earned something. Had I paid the same amounts into TIAA/CREF over my 50 years of employment I suspect I would not have to worry about health care reform. One of my friends retired from Stanford, and now gets from TIAA/CREF more per year than his salary as a full professor. Will government manage health care better than it has managed Amtrak, the Post Office, Social Security, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, FHA, the DC public education system -- well you get the idea.

So we shall soon all have the obligation to pay for someone else's doctor bills. I still don't know where you acquired the obligation to pay for mine. I do appreciate those who have volunteered to do that by subscribing.