Rep. Smith Confronts Clinton on Abortion, One-Child Policy

Folks,

Catholic Online and Lifesite News have an article entitled: Rep. Smith Confronts Clinton on Abortion, One-Child Policy. Please view the video on this confrontation below or at the following link:

Rep. Smith Confronts Clinton on Abortion, Coercive One-Child Policy

Truly I can't determine if Nancy Pelosi is the Great Whore of Babylon in Revelation 17:4-6, and Hillary Clinton the Jezebel of Revelation 2:20-23, or vice versa.

Fundamental Premises of the LDS Faith

Folks,

In the interests of ecumenism, open-mindedness, tolerance and fair play, I encourage one and all to read the following transcript:

Fundamental Premises of Our Faith - Talk Given by Elder Dallin H. Oaks at Harvard Law School.

I have not yet had the time to read this article in detail because I just got home from taking Monsigneur out to dinner after Mass, and it's almost 2130 hours when I pray the Holy Rosary. But one of my LDS friends left a comment to recommended this article as a response to my post:

An Anonymous Comment about Mormons

Yes, folks, it's true: I don't give liberal Democrats the time of day at this blog site, nor do they deserve it. But I do give people who say things like the following ample and rightful opportunity to explain their point of view here at this blog site:

"The power to create mortal life is the most exalted power God has given his children. The use of this creative power was mandated in the first commandment, to 'be fruitful, and multiply' (Gen. 1:28), and another important commandment forbade its misuse. ('Thou shalt not commit adultery' [Exo. 20:14], and 'Thou shalt abstain from fornication' [1 Thess. 4:3].) The emphasis we place on this law of chastity is explained by our understanding of the purpose of our procreative powers in the accomplishment of God’s plan." Elder Dallin H. Oaks

NO, I still do not agree even with what I briefly read of Elder Oaks' conclusions, BUT I will give him the respect that he is due, and as devout Catholics we all ought to do that. Hear the man out (or at least "read him out").

I will also provide the readership here with a detailed paragraph-by-paragraph critique from a Catholic perspective. I suspect that if this is anything like Elder Oaks' previous interview with PBS, then I will continue to find much to admire even if I disagree theologically.

Remember this: it's better to have LDS members as your friends and co-workers in restoring a sense of morality and sanity to this country than to be bickering about theology. How does that old saying go? "The enemy of my enemy is my friend." There is a common enemy: idolatry, sexual wickedness and rampant immorality. Let us therefore work together to restore America as the Christian Constitutional Republic she once was before the ascent of godless, immoral, idolatrous liberalism.

May God bless each of you: Catholic and LDS member alike!

My Cat Shoot

Folks,

I have had two cats, one named "Shoot" (as in "Shoot that gol'durn cat") and the other named Worf (after the Klingon Security Officer Worf on the USS Enterprise - he eats his food as a Klingon would).

Sadly, being 17 years of age, Shoot became very sick over the past few weeks. I brought him the vetinarian for blood work, but nothing was found amiss. Yet Shoot began defecating on the carpet, he lost interest in both food and cat nip, and he would howl long and mourful cries in the middle of the night. So yesterday, I had to bring my best buddy - the one who was with me before I got married and stayed with me after the woman divorced me - for his final visit to the vetinarian. An overdose of valium was given to him behind his neck and then I held him in my arms where he wanted to be till the end.

A few photographs follow.

May the reader please forgive this lapse into sentimentality, but unlike us humans who have eternal souls, the only thing of a pet that remains behind is our memory of him, and Shoot was the best and most faithful friend I have ever had, putting up with my temper tantrums, my smelly farts, my wickedly bad sense of humor, the trauma of my divorce, moving from NY State to North Carolina without a meow of protest, and all the rotten things that have happened.

My best friend ever - may he rest in peace.

Huge Quake Hits Chile; Tsunami Threatens Pacific

Folks,

Associated Press reports this morning:

Massive Earthquake Strikes Chile

An 8.8-magnitude earthquake kills dozens in Chile and raises tsunami fears across the Pacific.

This is a second massive earthquake in a little more than a month. We forget what Jesus stated in Mark 13:8 (NAB):

Nation will rise against nation and kingdom against kingdom. There will be earthquakes from place to place and there will be famines. These are the beginnings of the labor pains.

By the way, today's magnitude 8.8 earthquake in Concepcion and Santiago, Chile exceeds by more than a magnitude of order the magnitude 7.5 earthquake in Haiti on January 12. Of course, all these things pale in comparison to what awaits us for our idolatry, immorality, licentiousness and murderous ways:

The seventh angel poured out his bowl into the air. A loud voice came out of the temple from the throne, saying, "It is done." Then there were lightning flashes, rumblings, and peals of thunder, and a great earthquake. It was such a violent earthquake that there has never been one like it since the human race began on earth. The great city was split into three parts, and the gentile cities fell. But God remembered great Babylon, giving it the cup filled with the wine of his fury and wrath. Every island fled, and mountains disappeared. Large hailstones like huge weights came down from the sky on people, and they blasphemed God for the plague of hail because this plague was so severe.

Get ready, folks; the "fun" hasn't even started yet.

US Constitution Party - Copyrights and Patents

Folks,

The Eighth Commandment states:

"You shall not steal." Exodus 20:15 (NAB)

The Tenth Commandment states:

"You shall not covet your neighbor's house. You shall not covet your neighbor's wife, nor his male or female slave, nor his ox or ass, nor anything else that belongs to him." Exodus 20:17 (NAB)

That means very simply and directly that you and I don't get to take away and re-distribute what someone else has produced and now owns by legal and rightful means. That includes but is NOT limited to intellectual property protected by copyright or patent. Anything less than that is a violation of the Eighth and Tenth Commandments. The statement on Copyrights and Patents in the platform of the Constitution Party is entirely consistent with this:

Copyrights and Patents

Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution states that Congress shall have the power "to promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing" copyright and patent protection for authors and inventors.

We oppose the unconstitutional transfer of authority over copyright and patent policy from Congress to other agencies, domestic or foreign. We favor more vigorous efforts in both domestic and foreign markets to protect the interests of owners in their copyrights and patents.

Pope Pius XII's Encyclical, Rerum Novarum, expands on this concept of private ownership even more.

Paragaph 5 states in part:

"It is surely undeniable that, when a man engages in remunerative labor, the impelling reason and motive of his work is to obtain property, and thereafter to hold it as his very own. If one man hires out to another his strength or skill, he does so for the purpose of receiving in return what is necessary for the satisfaction of his needs; he therefore expressly intends to acquire a right full and real, not only to the remuneration, but also to the disposal of such remuneration, just as he pleases...Socialists, therefore, by endeavoring to transfer the possessions of individuals to the community at large, strike at the interests of every wage-earner, since they would deprive him of the liberty of disposing of his wages, and thereby of all hope and possibility of increasing his resources and of bettering his condition in life."

Paragraph 6 states in part:

"For, every man has by nature the right to possess property as his own."

Paragraph 8 states in part:

"The fact that God has given the earth for the use and enjoyment of the whole human race can in no way be a bar to the owning of private property. For God has granted the earth to mankind in general, not in the sense that all without distinction can deal with it as they like, but rather that no part of it was assigned to any one in particular, and that the limits of private possession have been left to be fixed by man's own industry, and by the laws of individual races."

Paragraph 9 states in part:

"Here, again, we have further proof that private ownership is in accordance with the law of nature...cannot but be just that he should possess that portion as his very own, and have a right to hold it without any one being justified in violating that right."

Paragraph 10 states in part:

"But those who deny these rights do not perceive that they are defrauding man of what his own labor has produced."

Paragraph 11 states in part:

"With reason, then, the common opinion of mankind, little affected by the few dissentients who have contended for the opposite view, has found in the careful study of nature, and in the laws of nature, the foundations of the division of property, and the practice of all ages has consecrated the principle of private ownership, as being pre-eminently in conformity with human nature, and as conducing in the most unmistakable manner to the peace and tranquillity of human existence."

Paragraph 22 states in part:

"'It is lawful,' says St. Thomas Aquinas, 'for a man to hold private property; and it is also necessary for the carrying on of human existence.'"

Paragraph 38 states in whole:

"Here, however, it is expedient to bring under special notice certain matters of moment. First of all, there is the duty of safeguarding private property by legal enactment and protection. Most of all it is essential, where the passion of greed is so strong, to keep the populace within the line of duty; for, if all may justly strive to better their condition, neither justice nor the common good allows any individual to seize upon that which belongs to another, or, under the futile and shallow pretext of equality, to lay violent hands on other people's possessions. Most true it is that by far the larger part of the workers prefer to better themselves by honest labor rather than by doing any wrong to others. But there are not a few who are imbued with evil principles and eager for revolutionary change, whose main purpose is to stir up disorder and incite their fellows to acts of violence. The authority of the law should intervene to put restraint upon such firebrands, to save the working classes from being led astray by their maneuvers, and to protect lawful owners from spoliation."

Paragraph 46 states in part:

"We have seen that this great labor question cannot be solved save by assuming as a principle that private ownership must be held sacred and inviolable. The law, therefore, should favor ownership, and its policy should be to induce as many as possible of the people to become owners."

Paragraph 47 states in whole:

"Many excellent results will follow from this; and, first of all, property will certainly become more equitably divided. For, the result of civil change and revolution has been to divide cities into two classes separated by a wide chasm. On the one side there is the party which holds power because it holds wealth; which has in its grasp the whole of labor and trade; which manipulates for its own benefit and its own purposes all the sources of supply, and which is not without influence even in the administration of the commonwealth. On the other side there is the needy and powerless multitude, sick and sore in spirit and ever ready for disturbance. If working people can be encouraged to look forward to obtaining a share in the land, the consequence will be that the gulf between vast wealth and sheer poverty will be bridged over, and the respective classes will be brought nearer to one another. A further consequence will result in the great abundance of the fruits of the earth. Men always work harder and more readily when they work on that which belongs to them; nay, they learn to love the very soil that yields in response to the labor of their hands, not only food to eat, but an abundance of good things for themselves and those that are dear to them. That such a spirit of willing labor would add to the produce of the earth and to the wealth of the community is self evident. And a third advantage would spring from this: men would cling to the country in which they were born, for no one would exchange his country for a foreign land if his own afforded him the means of living a decent and happy life. These three important benefits, however, can be reckoned on only provided that a man's means be not drained and exhausted by excessive taxation. The right to possess private property is derived from nature, not from man; and the State has the right to control its use in the interests of the public good alone, but by no means to absorb it altogether. The State would therefore be unjust and cruel if under the name of taxation it were to deprive the private owner of more than is fair."

There are many more excellent discussions of the right to own private property (of which copyrighted and patented materials are an example) in Rerum Novarum, but these suffice to demonstrate the point being made.

An Anonymous Comment about Mormons

Folks,

An anonymous person gave the following comment to this blog site’s recent entry, “Cardinal George: Mormons, Catholics must defend religious liberty”:

“I disagree. Do not compare yourself to the Mormon beliefs because they are false. The Catholic church needs to separate itself from the Mormon cult or the Catholic church will meet its demise. Maybe that is the reason why it will according to the Bible prophecies. Mormons are not true Christians. They believe that Satan is JESUS' brother and that people through good works can become like GOD. By saying you agree with the Mormons you are going against JESUS CHRIST, the Bible, and have lost your credibility with me.”

I have to wonder if this commenter actually listened to Cardinal George's speech at BYU. There's the link to the speech. If left clicking your mouse cursor on the link doesn't work, then please go to:

Cardinal George Addresses Religious Freedom in Speech at BYU

Now first, let me make one thing perfectly clear: I am not administering this blog site to gain credibility with anyone. I don't care what you think of me - I ain't that important. Indeed, people need to keep their focus on Jesus Christ, NOT on mere mortal man.

Second, I did NOT state in the post that I agreed with LDS theology. In point of fact, I do NOT. Excellent explanations critiquing LDS theology are provided at the Catholic Answers web site and do a far more credible job than I ever could. Relevant links are provided below:

Distinctive Beliefs of the Mormon Church
The Gods of the Mormon Church
Mormon Stumpers
Mormonism's Baptism for the Dead
Problems with the Book of Mormon

Third, how many so-called Catholics have any LDS members as friends, and how much have they interacted with them, gotten to actually understand what they believe, and observe how they lead their lives? In point of fact, most LDS people whom I know and with whom I am friends lead upright, honorable, morally virtuous and holy lives, unlike the majority of so-called Catholics in these United States. I have worked with various LDS members in my employment at multiple nuclear energy facilities in the United States. I have encountered ZERO exceptions among such LDS members to what I have described above, whereas I have seen plenty of exceptions among so-called Catholics, particularly those of the liberal persuasion.

Fourth, before anyone begins a criticism of LDS members, I encourage you to please read the following November entry this blog site:

Mormon Elder Interview Transcript from PBS

We ought never to judge a book by its cover.

Fifth, when I say that I have more in common with devout orthodox LDS members than with liberal Democrat so-called Catholics, I mean precisely that. Devout orthodox LDS members BELIEVE and have FAITH in Jesus Christ (regardless that their conception is completely alien to the Catholic one). They live moral and virtuous lives. They place God, Church and Family FIRST. Liberal Democrat so-called Catholics, however, place the false gospel of social justice and peace at any price ahead of the true Gospel of Jesus Christ. They are members of a political party that openly endorses the infanticide of the unborn and the filth of men lying with men as a legitimate alternative lifestyle. Indeed, right now a liberal priest in Albany, NY has authorized his diocese's social justice ministry to hand out needles to drug addicts, and another liberal priest in NYC is allowing gay people to take over his parish. Jezebel in Revelation 2:20-23 was placed on her death bed for crimes less than that!

No, I have NOTHING in common with these apostates and heretics who call themselves Catholic. They are of the worst sort. Having been raised Catholic, they are without excuse and KNOW better. LDS members may have the excuse of ignorance of the Faith once delivered unto the saints, but liberal Democrat Catholics have NO such excuse.

Yes, my LDS friends know that I disagree with them (quite emphatically) over theological matters, for all the reasons and more that our anonymous friend has correctly pointed out. BUT they ARE my friends and they live honorable and holy lives as much as they are able to do so. I wish that I were half as honorable and half as holy.

Furthermore, those (especially so-called Catholics) who legitimatize the infanticide of the unborn as the right to chose, or the sodomy between men as an alternate life style will (unless they repent) find themselves on the road to hell, and in God’s infinite mercy some of those LDS members whose theology we deride just may (under God’s infinite mercy and grace) make it into Heaven ahead of those of us who think we have the fullness of grace. God doesn't judge as men judge - He sees the heart.

Arrogance is unbecoming of us, especially during Lent. Let us pray for our fallen away brothers and sisters who are liberal Democrats, and our LDS friends who don’t have the full light of grace.

Now if because of these things I have lost credibility with anybody for being as Catholic as I can possibly be, then that person doesn’t have to read my blog posts any longer. Good bye and please have a good day (or evening, whichever it may be). As for me, I am proud of my LDS friends who stand up against today's liberal Democrats, the gospel of secular humanist atheism, and the dictatorship of relativism, for they proudly proclaim and defend morality, virtue, freedom and individual responsibility even when it's not popular to do so.

US Constitution Party - Conscription

Folks,

Robert Heinlein wrote the following in the "Notebooks of Lazarus Long" which are an excerpt from his novel, "Time Enough for Love":

No state has an inherent right to survive through conscript troops and, in the long run, no state ever has. Roman matrons used to say to their sons: "Come back with your shield, or on it." Later on this custom declined. So did Rome.

With that thought in mind, let us review what the platform of the Constitution Party has to say about this.

Conscription

US Constitution, 5th Amendment:

"No person shall be … deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

Conscription deprives a person of liberty without due process of law. This is clearly prohibited by the 5th amendment. Conscription is an involuntary taking of a person's labor-which is a form of property-without just compensation as provided by the eminent domain provisions of the 5th amendment.

Compulsory government service is incompatible with individual liberty.

We oppose imposition of the draft, the registration law, compulsory military training or any other form of compulsory government service.

We support a well-trained and highly organized volunteer state home militia, and voluntary Reserve Officer Training Corps (R.O.T.C.) military training in our schools, colleges, and universities.

EWTN Is Restored to Wilmington, NC Channel 75

Folks,

A check this evening verifies that EWTN programming has been restored to Wilmington, NC channel 75.

To the technicians at TCW who repaired the malfunctioning switcher, and to the people at Inspiration Ministries, EWTN and TCW who responded to requests for service restoration, please accept my thanks and I am certain the thanks of a great many devout Catholics in the area who watch EWTN nightly.

Tonight I will be praying the Holy Rosary with Mother Angelica and the Nuns of Our Lady of the Angels Monastery at 2130 hours.

Praise the Lord!

All Beliefs Cannot Be Equal: The Principle of Non-Contradiction - by Jim McCrea

Folks,

The following essay by my friend Jim McCrea preceded and is a prelude to his later essay, "Why Catholicism Is the Truth - by Jim McCrea." Both are commended to the reader's interest.

All Beliefs Cannot Be Equal: The Principle of Non-Contradiction
By Jim McCrea

No one can ever conceive that one and the same thing can both be and not be.
Aristotle

At first glance, it may seem arrogant and intolerant to claim that Catholicism is the one true faith, and therefore better than its rivals and its imitators. Such an objection draws its plausibility from a false ideal of equality prevalent in contemporary society. Fortunately, there is a logical and straightforward way to demonstrate that religions cannot be equal: for it can be shown that they contradict one another on many points. For example, if Islam denies the Trinity and Christianity affirms the Trinity, they cannot both be right. If Hinduism and Buddhism maintain that we are repeatedly reborn and live successive lives on earth, but Christianity teaches that we live only once, at least one of the beliefs must be false. Protestantism holds that the Bible is the sole source of divine Revelation and requires no magisterial interpretation, but only private or personal interpretation. Catholicism, on the other hand, holds that divine truth is revealed both by Scripture and by sacred Tradition, and that the Magisterium (from the Latin magister [teacher], i.e., the teaching authority of the Pope together with the bishops in union with him, guided and protected by the Holy Spirit) is the authentic interpreter of divine Revelation. The Catholic view of Biblical Revelation contradicts the Protestant view, so at least one must be wrong. The inequality of religions comes from the fact that with pairs of such contraries, both cannot be right. If a religion is objectively right on a given point, it is superior on that point. If both views are wrong, a third view asserting the truth is superior.

This fundamental inequality of beliefs is based on a first principle of reality and thought called the principle of non-contradiction: nothing can both be and not be under the same aspect at the same time. Because of the principle of non-contradiction, it is simply impossible for all beliefs to be right, and therefore equal, at the same time. It is, of course, axiomatic that truth is superior to falsehood.

Some, however, have denied the principle of non-contradiction in theory. They maintain that it is "narrow" to state something is false because it contradicts something else known to be true. They say that reality and thought are richer if we embrace "opposites"- that is contraries - as equally true. Such a thing, however, is not possible. Such impossibility is apparent in the very nature of the notions that contradict one another. With contradictory notions, exactly one must be true and one must be false. When we assert as truth that "there is a Trinity," we are necessarily asserting that the contrary "there is not a Trinity" is false.

In paradoxes opposites can be asserted, however, in a manner that does not violate the principle of non-contradiction. It is precisely these non-contradictory opposites that give us richness in reality and thought. It does not involve the direct opposition of being to non-being for a given thing at a given time. For example, let us consider the concept of the fully mature and realized man, who is both tough and docile. He shows toughness in that he is immovable in defending absolute principles, but is docile in that he is totally receptive to accepting a truth that he does not already know. He is tough and docile under different aspects, so that even though he embraces opposites, there is no contradiction. Reality readily encompasses innumerable such divergences.

Let us return to the principle of non-contradiction. Even those who deny it in theory appeal to it in practice. To advance any argument- whether true or false - the principle of non-contradiction must be used. To provide information in a given thesis, statements must be made in that thesis that exclude those which contradict them. The ideal of complete tolerance, where all beliefs are equally accepted, is impossible in practice. Even extreme liberalism, which attempts to preach such tolerance, is rabidly intolerant toward those systems which do not agree with their liberalism. Christianity is the prime example. It is precisely Christianity's claims of exclusive truth that caused Christians to be persecuted during the Roman Empire, an empire that prided itself upon being "tolerant" and "open to all beliefs." The effect of the underlying principle of non-contradiction working in the minds of the Roman officials was to outlaw Christianity on the basis that it did not accept the Empire's multitudinous gods.

Catholicism, then, is not narrow, but infinitely broad. It is capable of incorporating all that is true, good, and beautiful. The very term "catholic" means "universal." Catholicism is the only religion that is capable of this incorporation. The Catholic Church accepts all that is true about other religions and other systems. Any perception of narrowness arises because Catholicism must of necessity reject what contradicts truth, goodness, and beauty. Following upon the principle of non-contradiction, it must reject the not-true, the not-good, and the not-beautiful-that is, the false, the evil, and the ugly. This is precisely where the Church's condemnations and "thou-shalt-nots" are directed.

Update from EWTN on Wilmington, NC Channel 75

Folks,

EWTN has provided the following update on Wilmington, NC channel 75 - thank you, Spencer Swope!

Dear Mr. P.,

Thanks for your email. Time Warner had a problem with their Switcher, the piece of equipment that switches the programming from INSP to EWTN, and I’ve been told that the problem has now been corrected.

God bless,

Spencer J. Swope
EWTN Global Catholic Network
Regional Marketing Manager - South

Creeps, Nuts, and Independents

Folks,

Dr. Pournelle has an interesting essay at his Chaos Manor web site that is commended to your attention:

Creeps, Nuts, and Independents

In case you don't know, the Creeps are the liberal Democrats, the nuts are the RINOs (otherwise known as Country Club Republicans), and the Independents the rest of us.

We Independents aren't so smart: we want instant gratification and keep voting for corrupt politicians of either party promising that government can deliver. Well, folks, government cannot fix this mess. However, there is One who can, but it won't be easy and it won't be instantaneous. There will be penance. But we avoid that as if it were poison. Well, it is poison - for sin, that is.

US Constitution Party - Congressional Reform

Folks,

A few quotes from the writings of Marcus Tullius Cicero are in order before we begin our review of the plank concerning Congressional Reform in the platform of the Constitution Party.

Nimia libertas et populis et privatis in nimiam servitutem cadit.
(Excessive liberty leads both nations and individuals into excessive slavery.)

Nam quae voluptate, quasi mercede aliqua, ad officium impellitur, ea non est virtus sed fallax imitatio simulatioque virtutis.
(That which leads us to the performance of duty by offering pleasure as its reward, is not virtue, but a deceptive copy and imitation of virtue.)

Cicero would be sad to find himself quite at home in these United States where legislature has not changed in 2045 years, for like the Roman Senate before it, the US Congress is guilty of having and fostering both too much liberty, and too much pleasure.

Pax Romana. Pax Americana. Estne differentia?

Congressional Reform

"The Senators and Representatives ... shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution". - US Constitution, Article 6, Clause 3

With the advent of the 17th amendment, a vital check on Congress was removed. Since then, Congress has usurped power relatively unchecked, where today, very few members of Congress make it through a single session, without violating their oath of office to the Constitution.

The Congress of these United States has become an overpaid, overstaffed, self-serving institution. It confiscates taxpayer funds to finance exorbitant and unconstitutionally determined salaries, pensions, and perks. Most members of Congress have become more accountable to the Washington establishment than to the people in their home districts. Both houses of Congress are all too often unresponsive and irresponsible, arrogantly placing themselves above the very laws they enact, and beyond the control of the citizens they have sworn to represent and serve.

We seek to abolish Congressional pensions.

It is time for the American people to renew effective supervision of their public servants, to restore right standards and to take back the government. Congress must once again be accountable to the people and obedient to the Constitution, repealing all laws that delegate legislative powers to regulatory agencies, bureaucracies, private organizations, the Federal Reserve Board, international agencies, the President, and the judiciary.

The U.S. Constitution, as originally framed in Article I, Section 3, provided for U.S. Senators to be elected by state legislators. This provided the states direct representation in the legislative branch so as to deter the usurpation of powers that are Constitutionally reserved to the states or to the people.

The Seventeenth Amendment (providing for direct, popular election of U.S. Senators) took away from state governments their Constitutional role of indirect participation in the federal legislative process.

If we are to see a return to the states those powers, programs, and sources of revenue that the federal government has unconstitutionally taken away, then it is also vital that we repeal the Seventeenth Amendment and return to state legislatures the function of electing the U.S. Senate. In so doing, this would return the U.S. Senate to being a body that represents the legislatures of the several states on the federal level and, thus, a tremendously vital part of the designed checks and balances of power that our Constitution originally provided.

We support legislation to prohibit the attachment of unrelated riders to bills. Any amendments must fit within the scope and object of the original bill.

We support legislation to require that the Congressional Record contain an accurate record of proceedings. Members of Congress are not to be permitted to rewrite the speeches delivered during the course of debates, or other remarks offered from the floors of their respective houses; nor may any additional materials be inserted in the Record, except those referred to in the speaker's presentation and for which space is reserved.

"OF WHY THE SEA IS BOILING HOT - AND WHETHER PIGS HAVE WINGS."

Folks,

Please go over to Catawissa Gazetteer's blog site and read his latest entry:

"OF WHY THE SEA IS BOILING HOT - AND WHETHER PIGS HAVE WINGS."

This explains the ridiculousness of the global warming hysteria and the ludicrousness of the Obamessiah plans for the economy.

Thank You, Greg Bently!

Folks,

Greg Bently from Inspiration Ministries was very kind to provide the following explanation regarding the problem with EWTN not being on channel 75 in the Wilmington, NC area.

Thank you, Greg, and may God bless you!

Disclosure - I am a Social Media Specialist for Inspiration Ministries.

Please know that we are disappointed to hear that this channel is not functioning the way it should. I spoke with our affiliate team to get some insight as to what might be happening. Here are some thoughts: INSP and EWTN are still shared on channel 75. The “switcher” that changes from INSP to EWTN needs to be reset in TWC’s headend. Also, INSP is carried on digital channel 155 and EWTN on channel 156. TBN and all of the other religious networks are on digital, too. In the not too distant future, all of the religious networks will only be found on digital and all TWC subscribers will be need to use a digital converter on their tv to access this content. We recommend also that you contact TWC at a time when EWTN should be airing. Be sure that the CSR turns on a TV to show that EWTN is not airing with their own eyes so that they can start the process to get this "switcher" fixed. We hope that TWC is able to fix this as soon as possible. I will also check with a contact I have at TWC to see if he can check this out as well. For future reference he is on Twitter as @jeffTWC and handles customer service issues for TWC.

I hope this is helpful.

Blessings,

Greg

Nuclear Energy - 24 / 7

Folks,

I saw the following advertisement at the Atomic Insights blog site. While I disagree with the Nuclear Energy Institute's (NEI), NEI Nuclear Notes' and Atomic Insights' ingratiation of themselves with the liberal left, I completely agree with the substance of NEI's latest advertisement campaign. Please left click your mouse cursor on the picture to expand it so that its text is visibly readable.

Cardinal George: Mormons, Catholics must defend religious liberty

Folks,

I have written here and elsewhere before that as a devout and God-fearing orthodox Roman Catholic, I have far more in common with devout and God-fearing orthodox Latter Day Saints than I ever will with liberal Democrat so-called Catholics.

Francis Cardinal George, current President of the US Council of Catholic Bishops, in his recent address to Bingham Young University states exactly why I feel the way I do (though no doubt that wasn't his intention).

Catholic World News reports the following in its article, "Cardinal George: Mormons, Catholics must defend religious liberty":

Speaking before a crowd of 12,000 at Brigham Young University, Cardinal Francis George of Chicago delivered an address on "Catholics and Latter-day Saints: Partners in the Defense of Religious Freedom."

"I'm personally grateful that after 180 years of living mostly apart from one another, Catholics and Latter-day Saints have come to see one another as trustworthy partners in the defense of shared moral principles," said the president of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, citing the defense of marriage and family life, conscience protection of health-care professionals, and anti-pornography and anti-poverty.

Lamenting the "quasi-fascist tactics" and "thuggery" against supporters of traditional marriage, Cardinal George emphasized that religious freedom includes "the right to exercise influence in the public square."

US Constitution Party - Character and Moral Conduct

Folks,

Leviticus 19:20 states, "Speak unto all the congregation of the children of Israel, and say unto them, Ye shall be holy: for I the LORD your God am holy." (KJV)

Jesus Himself follows this up in Matthew 5:48 by saying, "Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect." (KJV)

Wisdom 6:1-9 is even stricter on the responsibilities of a nation's rulers: "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." (NAB)

Consistent with these Biblical passages, the platform of the US Constitution Party states the following:

Character and Moral Conduct

John Adams, 2nd President and signer of the Declaration of Independence warned:

"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."

He also counseled:

"The people have a right, an indisputable, unalienable, indefeasible, divine right to that most dreaded and envied kind of knowledge - I mean of the character and conduct of their rulers."

Our very Constitution is threatened when we permit immoral conduct by our leaders.

Public respect and esteem toward public officials has fallen to a shameful level. The Constitution Party finds that a cause of this national state of disgrace is the deterioration of personal character among government leaders, exacerbated by the lack of public outcry against immoral conduct by public office holders. Our party leaders and public officials must display exemplary qualities of honesty, integrity, reliability, moral uprightness, fidelity, prudence, temperance, justice, fortitude, self-restraint, courage, kindness, and compassion. If they cannot be trusted in private life, neither can they be trusted in public life.

It is imperative the members and nominated candidates representing the Constitution Party and its state affiliates recognize the importance of demonstrating good character in their own lives.

Why do we in these United States have an economic crisis, a racial crisis, a health care crisis, an energy crisis, a climate change crisis, and all the other crises that go along with these? It is because we have abandoned morality, righteousness and holiness.

2nd Chronicles 7:14 states, "...and if my people, upon whom my name has been pronounced, humble themselves and pray, and seek my presence and turn from their evil ways, I will hear them from heaven and pardon their sins and revive their land." (NAB)

Jesus follows that up with the following in Matthew 6:33:

"But seek first the kingdom (of God) and his righteousness, and all these things will be given you besides." (NAB)

Do we want social justice? Do we want the common good? Do we want peace and freedom? Then we must repent and be converted to the true Gospel of Jesus Christ, the Gospel of righteousness and holiness. Our elected leaders in their immorality and depravity are but reflections of what we are. That being the case, we deserve NO social justice, NO common good, NO peace, and NO freedom for we have willingly enslaved ourselves to sin. Simply turn on the TV and watch any popular TV show to see this: Bones, CSI, Law and Order, House, Battlestar Galactica, Star Trek, etc. What we see is rampant adultery, fornication, sodomy, murder, theft, torture, bloody violence and all manner of putrid, vile refuse that would make only the likes of Caligula the Mad and Maximillen Robespierre feel at home. Now what did John Adams say?

"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."

Witness now the great and magnificient decline of Babylon the Great. As Revelation 18:2-3 states:

"Fallen, fallen is Babylon the great. She has become a haunt for demons. She is a cage for every unclean spirit, a cage for every unclean bird, (a cage for every unclean) and disgusting (beast). For all the nations have drunk the wine of her licentious passion. The kings of the earth had intercourse with her, and the merchants of the earth grew rich from her drive for luxury." (NAB)

That is our fate should we fail to take to heart this plank of Character and Moral Conduct in the platform of the Constitution Party. It's Biblical. It's what Holy Mother Church has taught for 2000 years. And we had better heed the warning before God's mercy for little unborn babies turns into God's justice for us adults.

Time Warner Cable Blames Local Affiliate

Folks,

As the reader may be aware form today's previous blog entries, Time Warner Cable (TWC) has discontinued EWTN Catholic TV programming on channel 75 in the Wilmington, NC area. This is the response I received from TWC with regard to this issue:

Dear Mr. P.,

Thank you for contacting Time Warner Cable Email Support. At the end of this email, you will be given the option of taking a brief survey.

I understand you would like to restore Catholic EWTN programming to TV channel 75.

We would like to apologize for the delay in answering your query. We have received a large number of emails in the past few days, and it is causing a slight delay in our responses.

I apologize for the inconvenience and will be glad to assist you.

Contractual agreements for carriage or removal of specific programmers are negotiated at the corporate level and information about what our customers want on their cable service is taken into consideration during those negotiations. Each individual affiliate, such as Music Choice, makes the ultimate decision as to what programming they will provide to Time Warner for airing. If there is specific programming that you would like to see added, we encourage you to contact the affiliate directly.

I know how exasperating this has been for you, but we know the importance of our business with our valued customers. Let me assure you that what happened in your case is not typical of our level of customer service. We continue to be committed to providing you and all of our customers with the highest standards of service in the industry. While the lack of service you experienced is unusual and not the standard of our company, there is no excuse for a lackadaisical attitude on the part of any of our representatives.

I will do my best to resolve this issue as earliest possible. I have forwarded to our management team and can assure you that our Management team is taking the necessary steps needed in order to address this issue and hope to have it resolved very shortly. We certainly do appreciate your patience and apologize for any inconvenience that may have been caused.

Thank you for your patience and understanding.

OIL OVER $80 PER BARREL-WHY?

Folks,

Over at his blogsite Catawissa Gazetteer has an interesting article entitled, OIL OVER $80 PER BARREL-WHY?

We often talk nowadays about the energy crisis and global warming from fossil fuel combustion emissions, etc. But there is a solution: God has provided enough uranium and thorium in Earth's crust to fuel a planet of nine billion people or more at the energy consumption rate of the average American for hundreds of thousands if not millions of years, and all without green house gas emissions. Indeed, our current twin problems of peak oil and air pollution could have been avoided if in the 1970s we had continued to build new nuclear power plants after the TMI debacle. Instead, that accident which neither injured nor killed any member of the public became the greatest tool of the fossil fuel industry in stymieing the only major source of competition which could put big coal and big oil out of business. Now we stand on the brink of disaster because of the twin horns of fear and greed.

I therefore encourage the interested reader to review and study the following:

Nuclear Fission Fuel is Inexhaustible

The Nuclear Energy Option by Dr. Bernard L. Cohen

Ignorance about Nuclear Power is Killing Us (see the sublinks to articles by Dr. Cohen, Robert C. Morris and Peter W. Huber).

Articles by Dr. Bernard Cohen (written mostly in the 1980s and still applicable today)

As I have repeatedly stated here and elsewhere, the Lord God Almighty has given us all the resources on planet Earth that we need not just to survive, but to thrive. No population control is required. No conservation of energy use is required. And no polluting the environment is required. The ONLY reason why we do not avail ourselves of what God has given us is our own wilful greed and pride. We fully deserve the debacle we are currently in because we have created it. As St. Paul wrote, "Be not deceived. God is NOT mocked, for whatsoever a man soweth, that also shall he reap."

We don't have an energy crisis. We have a morality crisis.

Where to Contact Time Warner Cable Concerning EWTN TV

Folks,

Via telephone it is almost impossible to get to talk to an actual human being at Time Warner Cable. Therefore, please e-mail your feedback on the removal of EWTN Catholic TV programming from channel 75 by Time Warner Cable at the following link:

http://www.timewarnercable.com/Carolinas/support/supportform.html

Please be certain to have your Time Warner Cable account number ready as well as the last four digits of your Social Security Number since these digits serve as your Personal Identification Number (PIN) for the PIN field at the aforementioned e-mail link.

My short note to Time Warner Cable follows:

Dear Sirs,

Catholic TV programming from the Eternal Word Television Network (EWTN) has been suddenly discontinued from channel 75 and replaced solely by Protestant TV programming redundant to Protestant TV channel 74. It has been reported that EWTN programming is moved to digital channel 156, but this TV channel is unavailable to a great many Catholics in the Wilmington, NC area who subscribe to Time Warner Cable. In the interests of equal time, please restore Catholic EWTN programming to TV channel 75 without penalizing Catholics in requiring an extra purchase of a digital box when no such requirement exists for Protestants in having their own TV programming, now unfairly on two channels (74 and 75) to the exclusion of Catholic TV programming. Thank you!

[PWP]

EWTN No Longer Available in Wilmington, NC?

Folks,

On Saturday evening I was going to watch and listen to Father Corapi at 2200 hours on EWTN TV, which has always been channel 75 in the area of Wilmington, NC where I live. But when I energized the TV and selected channel 75, I observed that EWTN was not being broadcast; instead another Protestant TV channel (in additioon to the channel 74 Protestant TV station that already exists) was being broadcast. I thought this a minor error in programming that sometiems happens and thought no more about it till Sunday evening when I was going to recite the Rosary alongside Mother Angelica's TV show on channel 75 at 2130 hours. Again, another Protestant TV station had been designated than channel (redundant to channel 74 already controlled by Protestant TV programming). So I brought this to the attention of the Respect Life Coordinator at my parish, St. Therese. She in turn did some research and reported the following late last night:

What has happened? Did you notice that EWTN is no longer carried on channel 75 in the evenings but it is still listed on the TimeWarner listings? See:

http://tvlistings.timewarnercable.com/tvListings/

It has been replaced by yet another Christian station – Inspiration Ministries (out of Charlotte ) and EWTN split. BUT, EWTN is not on at all. Here is what we found out (or a little birdie that actually called Time Warner). Let them hear your voice, we want EWTN back! Pass the message on to your lists and encourage them to do the same. Let us know what your experience was when you contacted someone and their response.

It appears Time Warner Cable has moved EWTN to digital and can only be found on digital channel 156 (with the exception of securing a digital box from TWC), except the split which does not seem to be working as described.

Would you think this constitutes prejudice against the only Roman Catholic station being available to all when there are many Christian stations already broadcasting?

Would you also think that the requirement to have a box is an unfair tax on the Roman Catholics in this current climate?

Betty called EWTN at the insistence of Time Warner Cable implying it was not their problem. EWTN advised that their show is “free of charge” to the public.

So, what can you do?

Contact Time Warner Cable at 3500 Oleander Drive by calling (910) 763-4638 and let them you miss EWTN and would like to have it reinstated.

Contact local Wilmington Time Warner Cable and let them know your thoughts and you want EWTN reinstated as before. Be nice, but be insistent. Call: (910) 202-6002 , (910) 763-4638 (1949 Dawson Street )

Time Warner Cable – contact this office at 2508 Shipyard Blvd , Wilmington by calling (910) 796-6880.

Contact the City of Wilmington City Manager ’s office (see below for who and phone numbers to call) but call 910-341-7810 to let them know what you think.

Contact the NC Attorney General’s consumer protection division by calling 919-716-6400, but first read the article listed at: http://www.ncdoj.gov/cable.aspx. Or by sending an e-mail at: http://www.ncdoj.gov/Home/ContactNCDOJ.aspx .

Caudle, Tony
City Manager's Office
Deputy City Manager
910.341.7800
Tony.Caudle@wilmingtonnc.gov

Cheatham, Sterling
City Manager's Office
City Manager
910.341.7810
Sterling.Cheatham@wilmingtonnc.gov

http://www.ustvmedia.org/media-and-democracy/2009/10/07/whose-media-is-it-anyway?

Pass this e-mail on to your contact lists.

US Constitution Party - Bring Government Back Home

Folks,

Before we begin with the discussion on "Bring Government Back Home" within the platform of the US Constitution Party, let us review what the Catechism of the Catholic Church states regarding Subsidiarity in articles 1883 through 1885:

Socialization also presents dangers. Excessive intervention by the state can threaten personal freedom and initiative. The teaching of the Church has elaborated the principle of subsidiarity, according to which "a community of a higher order should not interfere in the internal life of a community of a lower order, depriving the latter of its functions, but rather should support it in case of need and help to co-ordinate its activity with the activities of the rest of society, always with a view to the common good."

God has not willed to reserve to himself all exercise of power. He entrusts to every creature the functions it is capable of performing, according to the capacities of its own nature. This mode of governance ought to be followed in social life. The way God acts in governing the world, which bears witness to such great regard for human freedom, should inspire the wisdom of those who govern human communities. They should behave as ministers of divine providence.

The principle of subsidiarity is opposed to all forms of collectivism. It sets limits for state intervention. It aims at harmonizing the relationships between individuals and societies. It tends toward the establishment of true international order.

I also encourage the interested reader to review the Acton Institute's article, "The Principle of Subsidiarity" by Father David A. Brosnich, a priest in the Byzantine Catholic Church.

Now let us review what the Constitution Party platform says concerning this:

Bring Government Back Home

The closer civil government is to the people, the more responsible, responsive, and accountable it is likely to be. The Constitution, itself, in Articles I through VI, enumerates the powers which may be exercised by the federal government. Of particular importance is Article I, Section 8 which delineates the authority of the Congress.

The federal government was clearly established as a government of limited authority. The Tenth Amendment to the Constitution specifically provides that: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

Over time, the limitations of federal government power imposed by the Constitution have been substantially eroded. Preservation of constitutional government requires a restoration of the balance of authority between the federal government and the States as provided in the Constitution, itself, and as intended and construed by those who framed and ratified that document.

We pledge to be faithful to this constitutional requirement and to work methodically to restore to the States and to the people their rightful control over legislative, judicial, executive, and regulatory functions which are not Constitutionally delegated to the federal government.

We stand opposed to any regionalization of governments, at any level, which results in removal of decision-making powers from the people or those directly elected by the people.

Knowing all these things, how could any devout Catholic - indeed, any true Christian - NOT support the US Constitution Party?

Three Essays - by Jim McCrea

Folks,

The following three essays written by my friend Jim McCrea cover the following topics:

Metaphysics: The Science of Being
Scientific vs Phenomenological Reality
Critique of the Intelligence

The first essay is actually a prelude to an essay that we have already reviewed: God and the Transcendentals - by Jim McCrea. All three were originally written as one piece in 2003. There is much wisdom in these articles and they are heartily commended to the reader's attention and interest.

METAPHYSICS: THE SCIENCE OF BEING
By Jim McCrea

The sciences which most people are familiar with, study being under one aspect or another. Physics, for example, examines being under the aspect of physical phenomena. Mathematics studies being in light of the principle of quantity. Logic studies being under the aspect of propositional truth. And Psychology looks at the thinking and emotive processes of human beings. What most people are not aware of, is that there is a science which studies being precisely as being. This science is called metaphysics.

The ultimate first principle on which reality rests, is the law of identity which states that a thing is what it is. This is not a mere tautology, such as the truth A=A in logic. It is much more. It superabounds in meaning.

The law of identity is manifest or differentiated into a number of aspects known as the transcendentals. The transcendentals are the universal modes of being. They are as extensive as being itself. They can be considered convertible terms for being - that is, although there is a distinction between the transcendentals as concepts, they are really different names for being. Being is so rich and deep, that even though it is one, several concepts are required to more thoroughly grasp it (so says Jacques Maritain in his Preface to Metaphysics).

The first transcendental is unity. This means that as far as a thing has being, it is one thing. Much of today's reductionist science attempts to understand nature more clearly by reducing things to their most fundamental components. If, however, you divide something to look at what it is made of, you depart from that thing. A thing is not simply its parts. The parts must be arranged into a unifying form to make that thing what it is. From this, it can be said that the best description of a thing is itself - that is, a thing cannot be better described in terms of something other than that thing.

The second transcendental is truth. This states that being has the capability of "speaking to" or being understood by an intellect - that is, being is intelligible. An intellect is not limited to grasping a thing piece by piece, but can apprehend it as a whole. As the eastern mystics say, when a tree is observed, its "treeness" is grasped by the mind immediately, without any mediating analysis. This property of "graspableness" of a being is its truth.

The third transcendental is goodness. This means that being precisely as being confronts a desire or affective response. In this manner it is related to the will and the affective center of the soul.

An important part of metaphysics concerns an analysis of evil. If goodness is a transcendental - that is, an intrinsic attribute of being - how is evil possible, since we can plainly see that evil has a real presence in the world? Evil is not the opposite of good, as many people believe, but its absence. It is not the absence of just any good, but a good which should be present in a thing, according to its nature. Evil, therefore, does not have existence in itself, but is only a parasite in good. It is a "hole" of non-being in the midst of some existing thing. (An objector may say that a tumor has being, yet it is in no manner good or desirable. The answer to this is that a tumor is not, properly speaking, a real being. It is an aggregate of beings [individual cells] which does not have true unity. Its essence consists of a lack of order in the cellular growth of the tissues of the tumor).

A fourth transcendental is beauty. Beauty is a property which indicates that being has integrity. It is an attribute of being to have a certain symmetry and order to its form. When this is present , there should be a response of delight and pleasure in the sensitive and intellectual faculties of one who perceives it. When ugliness is validly perceived as an objective aspect of something, it always indicates that a certain element of non-being is mingled with it. Something is missing within it - something it should have by its nature.

It must be realized, that in the study of being, that to be is not necessarily to be a physical object. All physical objects are surrounded by an enclosure of three dimensional space, with their parts distributed in that region of three dimensional space. Entities which we call spirits are not like that. A spirit is a concrete (particular existing) being which is not bound by the limitations of matter. It is not confined by an enclosure of space, and does not consist of parts.

The first to be mentioned are angels. They are not, as often depicted, effeminate creatures with wings. They are pure essences. All material beings are composed of matter and form. Matter is the total collection of parts which make up the thing, and form is the total arrangement and interconnectivity of the parts which gives it its essence as a being (form as defined here, is something deeper than mere shape). Essence is the determining attribute of a thing which makes it that particular type of thing and not another. The component parts of a car, lying in a jumble, is the car's matter. Even though all the parts of a car are present, there is no actual car. When the parts are properly assembled, a real car emerges, because form is added to the matter. When this happens, essence arises. We can therefore say that with matter and form there is "carness (its essence)," in which the intellect can make a true judgment that that thing is an actual car. In an angel, essence and existence alone are present. It has neither matter nor form.

Angels are far simpler than any material thing is, therefore they have a higher degree of unity (In their simplicity, they are not poorer in meaning than material things, but paradoxically richer). Since angels do not have parts or composition they cannot be divided or decomposed. They are, therefore, immortal.

Two material objects of the same essence (say two watches of the same kind), are distinct beings because they are enclosed in different regions of three dimensional space. Angels, which are free from the limitations of space, cannot be distinguished in this way. They are differentiated on the basis of essence alone. From this, it can be concluded that each angel is the sole member of its species.

At the summit of being is God. To have a finite essence is to be limited to one particular aspect of being. One finite essence expresses one aspect of being, and another finite essence expresses another aspect (i.e. a rose does not have the attributes of a sunset and vice versa). God is not a finite essence, and is therefore, not limited to a given aspect. All finite entities participate in being to a lesser or greater extent, but God is pure being. Even though angels are simple, in that they have no physical composition, they still have metaphysical composition. A real distinction exists between the love and knowledge an angel might have, and his being. Angels have knowledge and love. Because there is a real distinction between an angel and its attributes, it is logically possible for it to be without them. The fallen angels, for example, lack supernatural charity and knowledge. The love and knowledge that God possesses is, on the other hand, identical with himself. He is the very love and knowledge he has. Also, his essence is his own existence. In this, God has neither physical nor metaphysical composition. God is not only simple, but infinite. The transcendentals are, therefore, perfectly realized in him. He is perfect and infinite unity, truth, goodness, and beauty.

The question: "how is metaphysics possible?" can be answered by studying the nature of the intellect. Every faculty has a proper object to which it is oriented. The proper object of the ear is sound and the proper object of the eye is light. The proper object of the intellect is being or that which is. Metaphysics, as the science of being-as-such, is possible because certain truths about being-as-such are necessarily and automatically acquired by the intellect when it comes into contact with being. The law of identity, as mentioned above, is one. It states that if a thing is what it is, it is not necessarily what one believes it to be or would like it to be. This contradicts any form of relativism or subjectivism. The law of non-contradiction is another. This states that nothing can both be and not be under the same aspect at the same time. This law is essential if any form of intellectual reasoning is to proceed. The principle of sufficient reason says that if anything exists, occurs, or is true, it must have adequate grounds for existing, occurring, or being true. Nothing can have these, simply for no reason. The human mind's ability to understand the fact of God's existence is based on the principle of sufficient reason (i.e. this universe can possibly not exist - that is, it is not self existent - therefore, it requires a being who is self existent - that cannot possibly not exist - to explain it, which we call God).

These truths are self evident in themselves. It may be asked, therefore, that if this is so, why do not all philosophers accept them? This is because there is a distinction between their explicit and implicit understanding. Anyone who has a properly functioning intellect has an implicit understanding of them. All effective acts of knowing and acting require their use. In people who have only an implicit understanding of these truths, they are drawn upon automatically without a conscious understanding of them. A certain judgment of the intellect may be held with certitude, without a genuine knowledge of the laws of thought which enable that judgment to occur (i.e. the inference of the fact of God's existence from the contingency of this universe) The metaphysician, on the other hand, is able to reflect on his own mind as it understands reality. Metaphysics does not involve the discovery of any new knowledge, but brings to conscious understanding, that which may be unconscious in most people.

SCIENTIFIC vs PHENOMENOLOGICAL REALITY
By Jim J. McCrea

It is believed by many, that the mathematical means used to model nature, constitutes a valid and intrinsically comprehensive means of understanding reality. Religion and religious experience, it is believed, certainly has a place in the modern scheme of things, but it is viewed as a projection of personal meaning onto the life we experience. It is not seen today as statements of and contact with an objective reality.

The modern scientific method of description is mainly quantitative. Reality is reduced to measurement (This is a legacy of Descartes). For example, suppose you were to show a scientist a table and ask him what it essentially is. He would first describe it as a top supported by legs. Both the top and the legs could be described as rectangular solids (These are geometrical entities). In describing the material, he would discuss the various molecular and atomic bonds which exist within the substance of the table. These would be described in terms of bonding angles (a quantity), and electrostatic forces (another quantity). This, in turn, depends on quantum mechanics (reducible to probability). For specific phenomena, reality is reducible to the measurement of a ruler or the reading on a meter. For general phenomena, mathematical formulae are applicable.

Is this view sufficient, or is there something more? To answer this we have to invoke an analytical method known as phenomenology (phenomenology as a method of investigating reality, was developed by the philosopher Edmund Husserl early in the twentieth century). Phenomenology is an analysis of our immediate and pure perceptions of reality, which puts aside all preconceptions about it (you attempt to clear your head of all biases, prejudices, and mental comments on what you see. You perceive things purely and simply). This is fundamental knowledge which precedes all systematic descriptions of reality. In order for an individual to make any statements about reality, he must begin with what his consciousness perceives. Phenomenological reality is precisely that which is perceived by the mind, before any thinking about it takes place in the intellect.

An example may help to clarify this. This example will use the phenomenological method itself. Let us imagine that you are on a camping trip in the north, and let us consider a small time period within that trip:

You are at a point in the day when you decide to build a fire. You feel the air beginning to cool. The trees cast long shadows as the sun begins to set behind the mountain. You see a dead tree which is still standing. You pick up the ax and feel its weight. The application of the ax to the tree has a certain dull sound to the ears and sharp feeling to the hands. After the wood has been cut and the fire started you sit down and relax. The forest is dark now and the air is cold. The fire provides light to the immediate area and warmth to your body. The smell of burning wood hangs in the air.

What can be considered the truth of the camping trip, as it is presented to you? The very truth of the camping trip is what is purely and immediately experienced, as described above - prior to any intellectual analysis (This is provided that the intellect and senses are functioning properly. We must realize that the truth perceived here is not the subjective experience, but the subject's perceiving of an objective reality). This is primary truth, which is the phenomenological reality. This involves all five senses: sight, hearing, touch, taste, and smell. It involves our entire body. The intellectual analysis of our experiences (which is science), on the other hand, is secondary truth and primarily involves our brain. It is called secondary truth because it is derived from primary truth. Phenomenological truth is knowledge of reality, while scientific truth is knowledge about reality. Scientific knowledge, in general, consists of superficial featuresabstracted from phenomenological knowledge. Mathematical modeling is so useful for understanding reality because a large number of physical phenomena have features which closely approximate mathematical forms (Aristotle mentions this in his Physics).

Another example may help to clarify this principle. Suppose an engineer is to model an electronic circuit. A very simple model is initially chosen. Resistors are modeled with current proportional to voltage, and capacitors are modeled with current proportional to the derivative of voltage with respect to time. All the other components are modeled with such simple relations. The equations roughly approximate the behavior of the circuit. The modeling may be improved by considering non-linear effects within the resistors and parasitic effects within the capacitors. The model may be improved still further by considering electromagnetic effects between components.

The point is, no matter how refined the modeling process becomes, the full essence of the reality of the circuit board escapes the modeling methodology. This is because while the board is considered in more and more detail, the methodology is simply the consideration of superficial features derived from its phenomenological being. These aspects may be likened to a wire frame which approximates the outline of an object. The frame may be constructed in more and more detail, but the outline of an object never amounts to the object itself. The real "stuff" which fills these frames is its phenomenological reality. This is the real being, of which scientific reality is merely an approximate description. This is why metaphysics is required, in addition to the particular sciences which describe the universe. If the quantitative sciences alone were sufficient, all that would be real would be abstract measurements, with no actually existing things that they would apply to.

Although the true reality of the object is not contained within these mathematical forms (since these forms are mere abstractions from reality), these forms are still necessary for the understanding of material reality. They stand to phenomenological being as a skeleton stands to a living creature. They give phenomenological being its structure.

The conclusion is, we need not invoke religious faith directly (as a starting point) to understand the existence of a reality which transcends the empirical scientific method of thought. As explained above, such a reality is immediately present to our natural perceptions. If reality (as has been shown) is not confined to the scientific/mathematical mode of understanding, it may also be possible to infer the existence of levels of being above the level of phenomenological reality we have discussed (The eadlock of reality being confined to the traditional materialistic scientific mold is broken). By further analysis, the existence of a non-material soul may be inferred, as well as the existence of a supreme being. This would establish the validity of religious faith, which in essence, consists of statements about and contact with an objective reality.

CRITIQUE OF THE INTELLIGENCE
By Jim J. McCrea

One of the central problems in philosophy, today, is that of the intelligence. The problem is this: How can we know that our knowledge reflects reality - or, how can the mind know truth. Today it is commonly thought that we cannot. A psychological argument put forward, to advance this, is that our beliefs are a result of our experiences of the past, our needs of the present, and our goals of the future. If a judgment is made about something, it is always conditioned by the above factors. Since these factors are different for different people, it is said that a number of different people observing a single situation will result in a number of different views on that situation. This view of human knowledge, where it is thought that no absolute truth can be attained, is known as skepticism.

A physiological argument is put forward to support skepticism, as well. It is said that all information that we receive from the outside world must pass through sensory channels before it reaches the brain. It is argued that we do not have direct contact with the outside world (because of the mediation of the sensory channels) and that we cannot tell how much the data from the outside world has been processed or distorted, going through the connecting nerves, before reaching the brain. It is argued that, since we do not have a direct knowledge of reality, we cannot compare reality with what our brain receives via the senses, to determine if our knowledge of it is correct.

The modern problem of how our mind accurately knows reality began, in earnest, with Descartes (17th century). He postulated that we can only know, with certitude, the nature our mental states, and that the reality of the outside world must be inferred through a laborious process of reasoning. Later on, Kant (18th century), said that the objects we perceive with our mind are merely impressions of things. The real nature of the things causing these impressions - that is, the thing in itself - is not directly perceived and known.

Defense of the intelligence is vital in the face of today's intellectual and moral decline. How can this be accomplished? First of all, we see that the skeptic's argument contradicts the everyday facts of human life. Each person who possesses a functioning mind constantly makes judgments about the outside world - attesting to truth, falsity, good, and evil. This would seem to indicate that the philosopher who constructs a system of thought which is at variance with these natural insights (which he has when he is off duty as a philosopher) is not really interested in truth, but has some ulterior motive in mind. In these spontaneous, pre-philosophic judgments of truth, the mind is not only saying "I perceive that this is the case," but is also saying "this is true that this is the case." In constructing philosophies which are at variance with these spontaneous judgments, skeptical thinkers contradict themselves - that is, they split themselves in two.

The problem of how we can compare the contents of our mind with objects outside of ourselves is not truly real. It is a pseudo problem. The contents of our minds are the objects outside of ourselves. No real problem exists as to how we get outside of ourselves to attain to the outside world. As the philosopher Martin Hiedegger stated, the person (which he termed the dasein) is already outside and dwelling among things.

It is important at this point to look at the related problems of knowledge in more detail. The first datum of all knowledge are things as wholes – not things reduced to their component parts. Things as wholes are the true atoms of reality (This is a doctrine of Aristotle). To help demonstrate this, we can show that a thing is not simply its parts. A heap of car parts is not a real car. Only when the parts are properly assembled does an actual car exist. In terms of intelligibility and reality, the parts of a thing are less fundamental than the thing itself. The engine of a car, for example, only has meaning in terms of the car it goes into. The wheels of an automobile only make sense in terms of the automobile they go onto. The same principle holds true for the human body. The parts of the body are less fundamental than the body itself. The various organs of the body – the heart, liver, brain, lungs, etc. - only have significance in relation to the body they are a part of. The body itself is most fundamental. From the other end, we can see that the individual thing (or res), is fundamental in relation to the universal and the collective. For example, the concept of a collection of things only makes sense in terms of the individual items that go into making up that collection. In terms of relations between things or persons, the individual is metaphysically most fundamental. Marriage, which is a bond between two people, is only intelligible in terms of the persons which are united in marriage. With respect to universals, essence (which is the fundamental constitutive element which makes a thing what it is), only has meaning in terms of the thing it is an essence of. For example, "catness" which constitutes the essence of each and every cat, only has meaning in terms of actual or possible individual cats. The idea of a universal essence which does not refer to any type of individual, would make no sense.

We can look more closely at the intellect's visualization of things as wholes. This immediate perception is primary, whereas its analysis into its component parts is secondary. Our visualization of things as wholes, can be thought of in terms of four metaphysical moments. These are (1) essence, which determines to our mind what a thing is; (2) existence, which means that it has actuality and reality and is not a mere concept or possibility; (3) individuality, which means that it possesses its own identity, and not the identity of something else; and (4) externality, which indicates that it exists in the outside world, and that it is not a product of our own mind (i.e., a dream, hallucination, or figment of the imagination).

The distinction between these four metaphysical moments can be better understood if we consider situations with some of them absent and some of them present. For example, we could describe the essence of a vase which could be situated on a table, but which actually does not exist (it only exists as a conceived possibility). We could describe its shape, its smoothness, the material it is made of, and the features it has on its surface. In this we are describing the essence of a vase without existence. Externality is an element in this consideration of the potential vase because we are considering it as the possibility of something existing in the outside world. Individuality is an attribute because we are considering it as the possibility of a given vase, which would not be another. An object in a dream would have essence because, generally speaking, it is intelligible. It would have existence, because it has reality in its own right. It, however, lacks externality because it is a product of the mind and does not exist in the outside world. If you pick up a coin and ask "what is it?" and get the answer, "it is a penny," this addresses the principles of essence, existence, externality, but not individuality, because the answer only gives information as to what kind of thing it is and not what particular thing it is.

One fundamental fact that demonstrates that the intellect is a component of a non-material soul, is the fact that it is able to go outside of itself to attain to the outside world. If you observe the contents of a room you are in, you may observe all types of objects: tables, chairs, stereo components, books, etc. When these objects are observed, a real contact is made with them, with the observing intellect. The contents of your consciousness are these actual objects, and not merely impressions of them. Our introspection, when perceiving things, should tell us this. Those who philosophically deny that we can have this direct knowledge of things, may lack a reverence toward being which would enable them to simply listen to being (without bringing an agenda to it), so that it may reveal its true properties. They are not open to all of what being would tell them, but only that part of being which conforms to their preconceptions. For example, someone with a materialistic mindset may say that we are not in direct contact with the outside world because of the physical chain which links the outside world to the centers of perception in the brain (i.e. light bounces off an object, which then goes into the eye, which then activates the sensing cells on the retina, which in turn activates impulses in the optic nerve, which stimulates the proper parts of the brain, which results in perception). They mistakenly reason that this physical chain is the essence of perceiving, whereas it is merely the means by which the perceiving intellect is brought into a direct contact with things.

The main logical fallacy which materialists commit, when they deny metaphysical or spiritual realities, is that of confusing a necessary condition with a sufficient condition. Simply because something is necessary for our understanding of a given reality, it does not follow that it is sufficient. Something more may be required.

A fundamental contradiction exists in the philosophy that we have no direct contact with objective reality. One could not even have the idea of objective reality as a concept unless one were, in some way, in direct contact with an outside reality. This is because the very concept of objective reality must come from objective reality itself. It cannot come from something which is not itself. It is axiomatic that the unreal cannot be the cause of the real. The idea of objective reality cannot be mediated by something which is not itself for the same reason. We would have unreality mediating reality. For this reason we can see that Descartes' and Kant's theories, that we do not have direct contact with objective reality, and that we can have no contact with it at all, respectively, are false. The very notion of the objective reality they are denying, is being surreptitiously given to them by an objective reality they are in contact with. For the same reason, it must be asked, where the Buddhist gets the concept of the reality he then subsequently denies (he must have the idea first, in order to then reject it), when he says that all we perceive is nothing but illusion.

On a final note, those who deny that we cannot know if we have accurate knowledge of outside reality because of the mediation of the sensory channels, between the outside world and the brain (because we cannot tell how much the signals are distorted going through these channels), contradict themselves. Such an argument would only be valid if we had accurate objective knowledge of the sensory channels themselves. But this premise contradicts the conclusion.