Folks,
Today's Gospel Reading from Luke 10:1-12 is about the commissioning of the 72 other disciples to whom Jesus said, "...behold, I am sending you like lambs among wolves." How true those words were then and are today. Sometimes the wolves (both then and now) reject both message and messenger, for which eventuality Jesus gave the following instructions: "Whatever town you enter and they do not receive you, go out into the streets and say, 'The dust of your town that clings to our feet, even that we shake off against you.'"
But we have a promise that is given in today's Old Testament reading from Job 19:21-27: "But as for me, I know that my Vindicator lives, and that he will at last stand forth upon the dust; Whom I myself shall see: my own eyes, not another's, shall behold him, And from my flesh I shall see God; my inmost being is consumed with longing."
Like Job, is not your inmost being consumed with longing to see Him face to face? What these vicious wolves do in their addiction to the fleeting pleasures of this world with its temporal adulation and power can never ever take the reality of that promise away.
Jesus was brutally tortured, then crucified on a tree, and buried in the bowels of the Earth for three days because He loved us. But He rose from the dead and has ascended in victory to the right hand of God the Father. As Job declares, He IS our Vindicator and He LIVES! And someday (if we do not waiver and remain true to the Faith once delivered unto the Saints) we shall see Him face to face. (Some of us like me may have an extended stop-over in Purgatory - I pray to make it that far - but that's OK.) There will be no more tears, no more strife, no more dissension.
Rex pacis regnabit in aeternum.
Thursday, September 30, 2010
Our Cup Runneth Over
Folks,
This evening Michael Voris of Real Catholic TV could well be speaking about the couple of liberal clerics assigned to here in New Hanover County area. (Fortunately, though, we still have some good priests.)
Our Cup Runneth Over
As has often been pointed out at this blogsite, liberal clerics would do well to re-read Ezekiel 34:1-10. John the Baptist warned their spiritual forefathers, the Pharisees, in Luke 3:7-9:
We see that happening as Baptists and Pentecostals who actually BELIEVE in the Word of God proselytize more and more Catholics disaffected with the lukewarmness of such clerics, becoming in some sense those children of Abraham raised from the stones themselves. If the Church in America were not so lukewarm and liberal, then that would NOT be happening. What was it that the angel said to the Church at Laodicea in Revelation 3:15-19 that is so applicable to the Church in America?
Wretched, pitiable, poor, blind, and naked - are there better adjectives to describe the spiritual condition of a liberal Catholic cleric, or the USCCB as a whole?
This evening Michael Voris of Real Catholic TV could well be speaking about the couple of liberal clerics assigned to here in New Hanover County area. (Fortunately, though, we still have some good priests.)
Our Cup Runneth Over
As has often been pointed out at this blogsite, liberal clerics would do well to re-read Ezekiel 34:1-10. John the Baptist warned their spiritual forefathers, the Pharisees, in Luke 3:7-9:
"You brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the coming wrath? Produce good fruits as evidence of your repentance; and do not begin to say to yourselves, 'We have Abraham as our father,' for I tell you, God can raise up children to Abraham from these stones. Even now the ax lies at the root of the trees. Therefore every tree that does not produce good fruit will be cut down and thrown into the fire."
We see that happening as Baptists and Pentecostals who actually BELIEVE in the Word of God proselytize more and more Catholics disaffected with the lukewarmness of such clerics, becoming in some sense those children of Abraham raised from the stones themselves. If the Church in America were not so lukewarm and liberal, then that would NOT be happening. What was it that the angel said to the Church at Laodicea in Revelation 3:15-19 that is so applicable to the Church in America?
"I know your works; I know that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were either cold or hot. So, because you are lukewarm, neither hot nor cold, I will spit you out of my mouth. For you say, 'I am rich and affluent and have no need of anything,' and yet do not realize that you are wretched, pitiable, poor, blind, and naked. I advise you to buy from me gold refined by fire so that you may be rich, and white garments to put on so that your shameful nakedness may not be exposed, and buy ointment to smear on your eyes so that you may see. Those whom I love, I reprove and chastise. Be earnest, therefore, and repent."
Wretched, pitiable, poor, blind, and naked - are there better adjectives to describe the spiritual condition of a liberal Catholic cleric, or the USCCB as a whole?
Misapplication of North Carolina Statute on Parish E-Mail?
Folks,
I recently discovered that e-mails from a certain functionary at a certain local parish contained the following message after that individual's signoff - a message that I have NOT observed on e-mails from any other religious functionary, whether Catholic, Protestant or Jewish:
Please be advised that electronic mail becomes a "public record" when sent or received as part of normal business processes according to North Carolina General Statutes §121 2(8) and §132 1.
Of course, being trained in all manner of federal regulations with regard to nuclear energy, I looked up both State Statutes on the internet and discovered that they apply ONLY to public disclosure of e-mails from State Government Agencies, or between businesses and State Government Agencies, and NOT to public disclosure of e-mails from Roman Catholic parishes or other religious organizations to its parishioners. Thus, I became confused as to why any parish staff from priest to low level functionary would affix such a message on his e-mails generated during the course of work activities for that parish, so perhaps the reader can explain to me what I am failing to discern.
One can find the Statutes at the following web links:
http://law.onecle.com/north-carolina/121-archives-and-history/121-2.html
http://law.onecle.com/north-carolina/132-public-records/132-1.html
In fact, subparts (2) on "Agency" and (8) on "Public Record" in Statute 121.2, and all of Statute 132.1 are reproduced below. It seems that affixing the aforementioned notice of public disclosure would arguably constitute a misuse of a State Statute and hence be considered illegal, but I am NOT a lawyer. Indeed, perhaps a reader knowledgeable in law can advise:
Are there any State Statutes that mandate public disclosure of private information within a Roman Catholic parish or other religious organization?
Would invoking the aforementioned State Statute NOT arguably constitute a violation of the 1st Amendment and Section 1 of the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution?
To wit, North Carolina General Statutes §121.2(2) and (8), and §132.1 specifically state the following:
121.2(2)
(1) "Agency" shall mean any State, county, or municipal office, department, division, board, commission or separate unit of government created or established by constitution or law.
121.2(8)
(8) "Public record" or "public records" shall mean all documents, papers, letters, maps, books, photographs, films, sound recordings, magnetic or other tapes, electronic data processing records, artifacts, or other documentary material, regardless of physical form or characteristics, made or received pursuant to law or ordinance or in connection with the transaction of official business by any agency.
132.1
(a) "Public record" or "public records" shall mean all documents, papers, letters, maps, books, photographs, films, sound recordings, magnetic or other tapes, electronic data processing records, artifacts, or other documentary material, regardless of physical form or characteristics, made or received pursuant to law or ordinance in connection with the transaction of public business by any agency of North Carolina government or its subdivisions. Agency of North Carolina government or its subdivisions shall mean and include every public office, public officer or official (State or local, elected or appointed), institution, board, commission, bureau, council, department, authority or other unit of government of the State or of any county, unit, special district or other political subdivision of government.
(b) The public records and public information compiled by the agencies of North Carolina government or its subdivisions are the property of the people. Therefore, it is the policy of this State that the people may obtain copies of their public records and public information free or at minimal cost unless otherwise specifically provided by law. As used herein, "minimal cost" shall mean the actual cost of reproducing the public record or public information. (1935, c. 265, s. 1; 1975, c. 787, s. 1; 1995, c. 388, s. 1.)
I recently discovered that e-mails from a certain functionary at a certain local parish contained the following message after that individual's signoff - a message that I have NOT observed on e-mails from any other religious functionary, whether Catholic, Protestant or Jewish:
Please be advised that electronic mail becomes a "public record" when sent or received as part of normal business processes according to North Carolina General Statutes §121 2(8) and §132 1.
Of course, being trained in all manner of federal regulations with regard to nuclear energy, I looked up both State Statutes on the internet and discovered that they apply ONLY to public disclosure of e-mails from State Government Agencies, or between businesses and State Government Agencies, and NOT to public disclosure of e-mails from Roman Catholic parishes or other religious organizations to its parishioners. Thus, I became confused as to why any parish staff from priest to low level functionary would affix such a message on his e-mails generated during the course of work activities for that parish, so perhaps the reader can explain to me what I am failing to discern.
One can find the Statutes at the following web links:
http://law.onecle.com/north-carolina/121-archives-and-history/121-2.html
http://law.onecle.com/north-carolina/132-public-records/132-1.html
In fact, subparts (2) on "Agency" and (8) on "Public Record" in Statute 121.2, and all of Statute 132.1 are reproduced below. It seems that affixing the aforementioned notice of public disclosure would arguably constitute a misuse of a State Statute and hence be considered illegal, but I am NOT a lawyer. Indeed, perhaps a reader knowledgeable in law can advise:
Are there any State Statutes that mandate public disclosure of private information within a Roman Catholic parish or other religious organization?
Would invoking the aforementioned State Statute NOT arguably constitute a violation of the 1st Amendment and Section 1 of the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution?
To wit, North Carolina General Statutes §121.2(2) and (8), and §132.1 specifically state the following:
121.2(2)
(1) "Agency" shall mean any State, county, or municipal office, department, division, board, commission or separate unit of government created or established by constitution or law.
121.2(8)
(8) "Public record" or "public records" shall mean all documents, papers, letters, maps, books, photographs, films, sound recordings, magnetic or other tapes, electronic data processing records, artifacts, or other documentary material, regardless of physical form or characteristics, made or received pursuant to law or ordinance or in connection with the transaction of official business by any agency.
132.1
(a) "Public record" or "public records" shall mean all documents, papers, letters, maps, books, photographs, films, sound recordings, magnetic or other tapes, electronic data processing records, artifacts, or other documentary material, regardless of physical form or characteristics, made or received pursuant to law or ordinance in connection with the transaction of public business by any agency of North Carolina government or its subdivisions. Agency of North Carolina government or its subdivisions shall mean and include every public office, public officer or official (State or local, elected or appointed), institution, board, commission, bureau, council, department, authority or other unit of government of the State or of any county, unit, special district or other political subdivision of government.
(b) The public records and public information compiled by the agencies of North Carolina government or its subdivisions are the property of the people. Therefore, it is the policy of this State that the people may obtain copies of their public records and public information free or at minimal cost unless otherwise specifically provided by law. As used herein, "minimal cost" shall mean the actual cost of reproducing the public record or public information. (1935, c. 265, s. 1; 1975, c. 787, s. 1; 1995, c. 388, s. 1.)
Wednesday, September 29, 2010
What’s Gone Strange with America
Folks,
Please read the short entry “What’s gone strange with America” from California Catholic Daily that is discussed at the Lair of the Catholic Cavemen.
Some people don't like this blogsite because it unabashedly heralds that oh so hated "in your face" Truth, and without remorse exposes to the light of day the infidelity to the Faith once delivered unto the Saints and the moral cowardice that so afflicts clerics and laity alike within the Church in America. As the referenced article states:
"[Archbishop Chaput] told the scholars that their task is to strengthen their zeal in advancing the Gospel, their courage in struggling against sin, and their 'candor in naming good and evil.'"
And that is exactly what we have to do because evil wins when good men and women say and do nothing. Therefore, be militant and be "in their face." It is high time to confront evil. Scripture says that the gates of hell shall NOT prevail. That means that we (i.e., the Body of Christ) are attacking those gates and they do NOT prevail; it is NOT vice versa.
Please read the short entry “What’s gone strange with America” from California Catholic Daily that is discussed at the Lair of the Catholic Cavemen.
Some people don't like this blogsite because it unabashedly heralds that oh so hated "in your face" Truth, and without remorse exposes to the light of day the infidelity to the Faith once delivered unto the Saints and the moral cowardice that so afflicts clerics and laity alike within the Church in America. As the referenced article states:
"[Archbishop Chaput] told the scholars that their task is to strengthen their zeal in advancing the Gospel, their courage in struggling against sin, and their 'candor in naming good and evil.'"
And that is exactly what we have to do because evil wins when good men and women say and do nothing. Therefore, be militant and be "in their face." It is high time to confront evil. Scripture says that the gates of hell shall NOT prevail. That means that we (i.e., the Body of Christ) are attacking those gates and they do NOT prevail; it is NOT vice versa.
Feast Day of the Archangels Michael, Gabriel and Raphael
Folks,
Today is the Feast Day of the Archangels Michael, Gabriel and Raphael. As most of us may already know, Michael is mentioned in the Books of Daniel, Jude and Revelation, Gabriel in the Book of Daniel and the Gospel of Luke, and Raphael in the Book of Tobit which Protestants reject. Michael means "Who resembles God?" Gabriel means "God's Able-Bodied One" or "Hero of God." And Raphael means "Healing God." Michael is the Archangel who wars against Satan. Gabriel is the archangel who announces to Mary that She would be Mother of the Messiah. And Raphael is the archangel who accompanies Tobias to his future bride Sarah in Ecbatana, Media where the demon afflicting her is finally routed. What is interesting is that both of today's choices for the Old Testament reading in the daily Scripture readings are normally associated with Christ's Second Coming, et we hardly ever talk about that any longer:
Daniel 7:9-10, 13-14
Revelation 12:7-12ab
We run around daily in our lives with scarcely a thought that someday the words in Daniel chapter 7 will come to fulfillment:
The court was convened, and the books were opened.
As the visions during the night continued, I saw
One like a son of man coming,
on the clouds of heaven;
When he reached the Ancient One
and was presented before him,
He received dominion, glory, and kingship;
nations and peoples of every language serve him.
His dominion is an everlasting dominion
that shall not be taken away,
his kingship shall not be destroyed.
As Luke 17:26-27 states, "As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be in the days of the Son of Man; they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage up to the day that Noah entered the ark, and the flood came and destroyed them all."
Let us remember the prayer to St. Michael the Archangel that Pope Leo XIII wrote just before communism rose in Europe and Russia:
Sancte Michael Archangele,
defende nos in proelio;
contra nequitiam et insidias diaboli esto praesidium.
Imperat illi Deus;
supplices deprecamur:
tuque, Princeps militiae coelestis,
Satanam aliosque spiritus malignos,
qui ad perditionem animarum pervagantur in mundo,
divina virtute in infernum detrude.
Amen
While it took most the the Twentieth Century to defeat communism, I truly do not think the good Lord will tarry much longer given the present circumstances. But whatever the case may be, it is always wise to recite the pray to Saint Michael the Archangel. As Revelation 12:7-8 states, "Then war broke out in heaven; Michael and his angels battled against the dragon. The dragon and its angels fought back, but they did not prevail and there was no longer any place for them in heaven." Soon there will no longer be any place for them on Earth, but as Catawissa Gazetteer daily reminds us at his blogsite, we still have much purification to go through.
Today is the Feast Day of the Archangels Michael, Gabriel and Raphael. As most of us may already know, Michael is mentioned in the Books of Daniel, Jude and Revelation, Gabriel in the Book of Daniel and the Gospel of Luke, and Raphael in the Book of Tobit which Protestants reject. Michael means "Who resembles God?" Gabriel means "God's Able-Bodied One" or "Hero of God." And Raphael means "Healing God." Michael is the Archangel who wars against Satan. Gabriel is the archangel who announces to Mary that She would be Mother of the Messiah. And Raphael is the archangel who accompanies Tobias to his future bride Sarah in Ecbatana, Media where the demon afflicting her is finally routed. What is interesting is that both of today's choices for the Old Testament reading in the daily Scripture readings are normally associated with Christ's Second Coming, et we hardly ever talk about that any longer:
Daniel 7:9-10, 13-14
Revelation 12:7-12ab
We run around daily in our lives with scarcely a thought that someday the words in Daniel chapter 7 will come to fulfillment:
The court was convened, and the books were opened.
As the visions during the night continued, I saw
One like a son of man coming,
on the clouds of heaven;
When he reached the Ancient One
and was presented before him,
He received dominion, glory, and kingship;
nations and peoples of every language serve him.
His dominion is an everlasting dominion
that shall not be taken away,
his kingship shall not be destroyed.
As Luke 17:26-27 states, "As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be in the days of the Son of Man; they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage up to the day that Noah entered the ark, and the flood came and destroyed them all."
Let us remember the prayer to St. Michael the Archangel that Pope Leo XIII wrote just before communism rose in Europe and Russia:
Sancte Michael Archangele,
defende nos in proelio;
contra nequitiam et insidias diaboli esto praesidium.
Imperat illi Deus;
supplices deprecamur:
tuque, Princeps militiae coelestis,
Satanam aliosque spiritus malignos,
qui ad perditionem animarum pervagantur in mundo,
divina virtute in infernum detrude.
Amen
While it took most the the Twentieth Century to defeat communism, I truly do not think the good Lord will tarry much longer given the present circumstances. But whatever the case may be, it is always wise to recite the pray to Saint Michael the Archangel. As Revelation 12:7-8 states, "Then war broke out in heaven; Michael and his angels battled against the dragon. The dragon and its angels fought back, but they did not prevail and there was no longer any place for them in heaven." Soon there will no longer be any place for them on Earth, but as Catawissa Gazetteer daily reminds us at his blogsite, we still have much purification to go through.
Academicians in the Ponitifcal Academy of Sciences
Folks,
In yesterday's post "More on Stephen Hawking's 'The Grand Design'" I had mentioned that Stephen Hawking is a member of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences. There are scores of other names listed among the "Ordinary Academicians". Of these many scientists I only recognize two other names: astronomer Martin J. Rees, several of whose books on the creation of the universe I have actually read (albeit some number of years ago), and Carlo Rubbia, a nuclear scientist who came up with the idea of an energy amplifier to consume spent nuclear fuel and generate useful electricity. His proposal is proton accelerator - neutron spallation device that would keep a sub-critical assembly of nuclear fuel (whether "spent" or not) fissioning until all the actinides remaining in the fuel were consumed and only fission products with relatively short radioactive half lives would remain. His idea would have made a spent geologic repository like Yucca Mountain a moot point (removing in the process a campaign plank for the infamous Harry Reid, though being an Italian citizen, that certainly wasn't in Dr. Rubbia's mind).
It is sad that I recognize only three names among the scores of academicians in the Pontifical Academy of Sciences. I would have liked to have considered myself better informed, but alas, such is not the case. I am particularly happy, however, about the inclusion of Dr. Rubbia and I hope that his idea will gain merit within the commercial nuclear industry. Along with the GE-Hitachi PRISM reactor, it really is the perfect solution for the stock-piling of spent nuclear fuel locally at reactors throughout the country.
In yesterday's post "More on Stephen Hawking's 'The Grand Design'" I had mentioned that Stephen Hawking is a member of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences. There are scores of other names listed among the "Ordinary Academicians". Of these many scientists I only recognize two other names: astronomer Martin J. Rees, several of whose books on the creation of the universe I have actually read (albeit some number of years ago), and Carlo Rubbia, a nuclear scientist who came up with the idea of an energy amplifier to consume spent nuclear fuel and generate useful electricity. His proposal is proton accelerator - neutron spallation device that would keep a sub-critical assembly of nuclear fuel (whether "spent" or not) fissioning until all the actinides remaining in the fuel were consumed and only fission products with relatively short radioactive half lives would remain. His idea would have made a spent geologic repository like Yucca Mountain a moot point (removing in the process a campaign plank for the infamous Harry Reid, though being an Italian citizen, that certainly wasn't in Dr. Rubbia's mind).
It is sad that I recognize only three names among the scores of academicians in the Pontifical Academy of Sciences. I would have liked to have considered myself better informed, but alas, such is not the case. I am particularly happy, however, about the inclusion of Dr. Rubbia and I hope that his idea will gain merit within the commercial nuclear industry. Along with the GE-Hitachi PRISM reactor, it really is the perfect solution for the stock-piling of spent nuclear fuel locally at reactors throughout the country.
Tuesday, September 28, 2010
More on Stephen Hawking's "The Grand Design"
Folks,
Rich Deem at the Evidence for God web site points out the following:
So, Stephen Hawking wants us to believe that a nebulous set of theories, which cannot be confirmed through observational data, absolutely establishes that an infinite number of diverse universes exist, having been created from laws of physics that just happen to allow this. John Horgan, a fellow atheist, says that the popularity of M-theory is the result of "stubborn refusal of enthusiasts to abandon their faith." Is it not more likely that a super-intelligent, powerful Being invented the laws of physics that produced the universe? Skeptics always ask, "Who created God?" Maybe they already have the answer to that question - Nothing! After all, they seem to think that nothing is a powerful force for creating things!
The entire article is available here: Why Stephen Hawking is Wrong About God Not Creating the Universe.
Perhaps, however, the following article in Scientific American has the most appropriate title:
Cosmic Clowning: Stephen Hawking's "new" theory of everything is the same old CRAP
CRAP stands for the "Completely Ridiculous Anthropic Principle" which states that the universe is the way it is because I am observing it that way. Technically, this principle derives from WAP and SAP. The weak anthropic principle, or WAP, holds merely that any cosmic observer will observe conditions, at least locally, that make the observer's existence possible. The strong version, SAP, says that the universe must be constructed so as to make observers possible. Didn't Pope Benedict XVI say something about this kind of philosophy, calling it the dictatorship of relativism? One wonders then when Stephen Hawking will be removed as an academician in the Pontifical Academy of Sciences (just left click your mouse cursor on Dr. Hawking's name to see for yourself). It doesn't appear that the Academy listens too closely to our Holy Father.
I encourage the reader to digest both articles. I don't necessarily agree with all of the first author's Protestant fundamentalism or the second author's condescending manner towards religious people. However, the second author's conclusion is little different than the first's and equal correct though a bit more succint:
...Hawking is telling us that unconfirmable M-theory plus the anthropic tautology represents the end of that quest. If we believe him, the joke's on us.
Rich Deem at the Evidence for God web site points out the following:
So, Stephen Hawking wants us to believe that a nebulous set of theories, which cannot be confirmed through observational data, absolutely establishes that an infinite number of diverse universes exist, having been created from laws of physics that just happen to allow this. John Horgan, a fellow atheist, says that the popularity of M-theory is the result of "stubborn refusal of enthusiasts to abandon their faith." Is it not more likely that a super-intelligent, powerful Being invented the laws of physics that produced the universe? Skeptics always ask, "Who created God?" Maybe they already have the answer to that question - Nothing! After all, they seem to think that nothing is a powerful force for creating things!
The entire article is available here: Why Stephen Hawking is Wrong About God Not Creating the Universe.
Perhaps, however, the following article in Scientific American has the most appropriate title:
Cosmic Clowning: Stephen Hawking's "new" theory of everything is the same old CRAP
CRAP stands for the "Completely Ridiculous Anthropic Principle" which states that the universe is the way it is because I am observing it that way. Technically, this principle derives from WAP and SAP. The weak anthropic principle, or WAP, holds merely that any cosmic observer will observe conditions, at least locally, that make the observer's existence possible. The strong version, SAP, says that the universe must be constructed so as to make observers possible. Didn't Pope Benedict XVI say something about this kind of philosophy, calling it the dictatorship of relativism? One wonders then when Stephen Hawking will be removed as an academician in the Pontifical Academy of Sciences (just left click your mouse cursor on Dr. Hawking's name to see for yourself). It doesn't appear that the Academy listens too closely to our Holy Father.
I encourage the reader to digest both articles. I don't necessarily agree with all of the first author's Protestant fundamentalism or the second author's condescending manner towards religious people. However, the second author's conclusion is little different than the first's and equal correct though a bit more succint:
...Hawking is telling us that unconfirmable M-theory plus the anthropic tautology represents the end of that quest. If we believe him, the joke's on us.
No Smoking! No Trans-Fat! And No Defiance of Liberal Priests!
Folks,
As Michael Voris of Real Catholic TV points out this evening, liberals believe in Objective Truth and Morality when it comes to smoking or trans-fat or the environment, but not when it comes to what REALLY counts. Ever wonder why?
No Smoking! No Trans-Fat!
Well, one doesn't go to hell for driving a gas guzzling SUV, or smoking a cigarette, or eating a cheese burger and fries. But as Mr. Voris correctly points out, Revelation 21:8 does specify exactly who does go to hell:
But as for cowards, the unfaithful, the depraved, murderers, the unchaste, sorcerers, idol-worshipers, and deceivers of every sort, their lot is in the burning pool of fire and sulfur, which is the second death.
This is the sort of "in your face" truth with which Sacred Scripture is replete. On a separate note, an anonymous person described the following in the comments section of this blogsite: A certain chest-thumping DRE from a certain parish dominated by a newly appointed liberal cleric recently bragged that his priest knows how to deal with such "in your face" truth.
It is hard to know what the exact conversation was beyond the third comment entered here, but if the report is accurate and correct, then the cowardice, infidelity and deception (three of the eight crimes cited by St. John) seem readily apparent. So one wonders when Revelation 21:8 comes to pass, how the inevitable "in your face" truth will be dealt with by any of us (myself included).
As the commenter reminded us, thirty pieces of silver is such a paltry sum. I much prefer my cheeseburger and the chance to go to Heaven than to ever bend knee to a liberal even if I have to spend ten thousand years in Purgatory. And I am happy to say that Mr. Voris' video is entirely consistent with that point of view.
As Michael Voris of Real Catholic TV points out this evening, liberals believe in Objective Truth and Morality when it comes to smoking or trans-fat or the environment, but not when it comes to what REALLY counts. Ever wonder why?
No Smoking! No Trans-Fat!
Well, one doesn't go to hell for driving a gas guzzling SUV, or smoking a cigarette, or eating a cheese burger and fries. But as Mr. Voris correctly points out, Revelation 21:8 does specify exactly who does go to hell:
But as for cowards, the unfaithful, the depraved, murderers, the unchaste, sorcerers, idol-worshipers, and deceivers of every sort, their lot is in the burning pool of fire and sulfur, which is the second death.
This is the sort of "in your face" truth with which Sacred Scripture is replete. On a separate note, an anonymous person described the following in the comments section of this blogsite: A certain chest-thumping DRE from a certain parish dominated by a newly appointed liberal cleric recently bragged that his priest knows how to deal with such "in your face" truth.
It is hard to know what the exact conversation was beyond the third comment entered here, but if the report is accurate and correct, then the cowardice, infidelity and deception (three of the eight crimes cited by St. John) seem readily apparent. So one wonders when Revelation 21:8 comes to pass, how the inevitable "in your face" truth will be dealt with by any of us (myself included).
As the commenter reminded us, thirty pieces of silver is such a paltry sum. I much prefer my cheeseburger and the chance to go to Heaven than to ever bend knee to a liberal even if I have to spend ten thousand years in Purgatory. And I am happy to say that Mr. Voris' video is entirely consistent with that point of view.
More Marxism in Our Churches
Folks,
I call everyone's attention to Catawissa Gazetteer's most recent post, More Marxism in Our Churches. As Catawissa concludes:
It's past the time to speak up. We need to shout from the rooftops. Don't just go along to get along in your church. If you hear or read something that you know isn't right, [then] talk to your pastor. If he doesn't do anything, [then] talk to your fellow church members. Be a pain in the ass! Whatever you do, make noise!
Our time is short and the truth is being destroyed. Pray for protection.
I intend to be a pain in the rear end because evil wins when good men say and do nothing.
I call everyone's attention to Catawissa Gazetteer's most recent post, More Marxism in Our Churches. As Catawissa concludes:
It's past the time to speak up. We need to shout from the rooftops. Don't just go along to get along in your church. If you hear or read something that you know isn't right, [then] talk to your pastor. If he doesn't do anything, [then] talk to your fellow church members. Be a pain in the ass! Whatever you do, make noise!
Our time is short and the truth is being destroyed. Pray for protection.
I intend to be a pain in the rear end because evil wins when good men say and do nothing.
Monday, September 27, 2010
Criticism of Michael Voris and Other Spokespersons for Orthodoxy
Folks,
From time to time I receive comments criticizing Michael Voris of Real Catholic TV as a hypocrite, or as being uncharitable, unkind, intolerant or divisive. Having never met the man, I cannot testify as to his character. But there is an old principle that the Germans of the Weimer Republic ignored to their peril: All that evil needs to win is for good men to say nothing. That is NOT Mr. Voris' style and that is what irks the Democrat clerics who themselves are most undemocratic.
We have in the Church today liberal clerics and certain lay persons supporting them who are in love with their own sense of local political power in their parish(es) and diocese(s). All that their evil needs in order to win is for those who remain orthodox, faithful and true to say and do nothing out of some false (but well-meaning) sense of loyalty to the robes a liberal cleric wears, and the honor that he (like his Pharisee forefathers) demands are accorded to him.
Further, it is incomprehensible why certain lay persons (supposedly conservative in morals and values) would betray their closest friends in order to gain or retain a temporal power at a parish or diocese that lasts but a season. Yet such people (enamored with the love of this world) insist on ingratiating themselves with a liberal cleric even if that means condemning a victim completely duped by them and unaware of their treachery.
Good people have got to speak out. That is what Michael Voris does. In his most recent video, "Catholic Tea Party", he does discuss how the problems in the Church aren't just with liberal clerics, but with a certain underpinning that is sneaky and devious in all of its Machiavellian machinations.
So once again, all that evil needs to win is for good men to say nothing. I applaud Mr. Voris that he does not bend to some sort of false sense of honor and obedience that these people - lay or cleric - demand for themselves. With the Holy Spirit inspiring people like him, no lamp is being hidden under a bushel and that is exactly what evil fears - exposure to the light of day where it will wither up and die.
Let us pray for our Bishop, Priests and fellow Lay Persons so that my friend's prediction this morning of a division creating a false American Catholic Church side by side with the One True Roman Catholic Church does NOT come to pass.
Avē Marīa, grātiā plēna, Dominus tēcum.
Benedicta tū in mulieribus,
et benedictus frūctus ventris tuī, Iēsus.
Sāncta Marīa, Māter Deī,
ōrā prō nōbīs peccātōribus,
nunc et in hōrā mortis nostrae.
Āmēn.
From time to time I receive comments criticizing Michael Voris of Real Catholic TV as a hypocrite, or as being uncharitable, unkind, intolerant or divisive. Having never met the man, I cannot testify as to his character. But there is an old principle that the Germans of the Weimer Republic ignored to their peril: All that evil needs to win is for good men to say nothing. That is NOT Mr. Voris' style and that is what irks the Democrat clerics who themselves are most undemocratic.
We have in the Church today liberal clerics and certain lay persons supporting them who are in love with their own sense of local political power in their parish(es) and diocese(s). All that their evil needs in order to win is for those who remain orthodox, faithful and true to say and do nothing out of some false (but well-meaning) sense of loyalty to the robes a liberal cleric wears, and the honor that he (like his Pharisee forefathers) demands are accorded to him.
Further, it is incomprehensible why certain lay persons (supposedly conservative in morals and values) would betray their closest friends in order to gain or retain a temporal power at a parish or diocese that lasts but a season. Yet such people (enamored with the love of this world) insist on ingratiating themselves with a liberal cleric even if that means condemning a victim completely duped by them and unaware of their treachery.
Good people have got to speak out. That is what Michael Voris does. In his most recent video, "Catholic Tea Party", he does discuss how the problems in the Church aren't just with liberal clerics, but with a certain underpinning that is sneaky and devious in all of its Machiavellian machinations.
So once again, all that evil needs to win is for good men to say nothing. I applaud Mr. Voris that he does not bend to some sort of false sense of honor and obedience that these people - lay or cleric - demand for themselves. With the Holy Spirit inspiring people like him, no lamp is being hidden under a bushel and that is exactly what evil fears - exposure to the light of day where it will wither up and die.
Let us pray for our Bishop, Priests and fellow Lay Persons so that my friend's prediction this morning of a division creating a false American Catholic Church side by side with the One True Roman Catholic Church does NOT come to pass.
Avē Marīa, grātiā plēna, Dominus tēcum.
Benedicta tū in mulieribus,
et benedictus frūctus ventris tuī, Iēsus.
Sāncta Marīa, Māter Deī,
ōrā prō nōbīs peccātōribus,
nunc et in hōrā mortis nostrae.
Āmēn.
The Catholic Tea Party
Folks,
I really like how Michael Voris of Real Catholic TV names names and once again tells the unvarnished truth in his latest video, "Catholic Tea Party". Today he confirms what I have seen and heard since my return from my business trip to Texas. He discusses how voters are purging the Republican ranks of traitors and beaucrats in political office, otherwise known as RINOs. He compares this near the end of his video with how death and judgment are purging the Church in America of the same in clerical office. Those aren't my words. Those are Mr. Voris' words.
Yes, sadly we have here in the New Hanover County area a couple of such career liberal priests about whom Mr. Voris talks so eloquently. And the two things Mr. Voris says to do about them at around the two minute mark in his video is to (1) pray for them and (2) alert as many of Catholics as possible to their treachery.
Ezekiel 34:1-10 comes to mind once again. The Good Shepherd will NOT tolerate indefinitely the misuse and abuse that these liberal Democrat clerics visit on the sheep. Yes, these liberal clerics can and do banish into the hinter lands orthodox instructors and falsely accuse holy parishioners of disobedience, but the time is coming when Jesus Christ WILL return to Earth and we shall all given an accounting. Pretense by cleric and laity alike at social justice at the expense of righteousness and holiness won't count for anything any longer.
Liberal - Progressive - Democrat: next to RINO those are three of the dirtest words I know.
I really like how Michael Voris of Real Catholic TV names names and once again tells the unvarnished truth in his latest video, "Catholic Tea Party". Today he confirms what I have seen and heard since my return from my business trip to Texas. He discusses how voters are purging the Republican ranks of traitors and beaucrats in political office, otherwise known as RINOs. He compares this near the end of his video with how death and judgment are purging the Church in America of the same in clerical office. Those aren't my words. Those are Mr. Voris' words.
Yes, sadly we have here in the New Hanover County area a couple of such career liberal priests about whom Mr. Voris talks so eloquently. And the two things Mr. Voris says to do about them at around the two minute mark in his video is to (1) pray for them and (2) alert as many of Catholics as possible to their treachery.
Ezekiel 34:1-10 comes to mind once again. The Good Shepherd will NOT tolerate indefinitely the misuse and abuse that these liberal Democrat clerics visit on the sheep. Yes, these liberal clerics can and do banish into the hinter lands orthodox instructors and falsely accuse holy parishioners of disobedience, but the time is coming when Jesus Christ WILL return to Earth and we shall all given an accounting. Pretense by cleric and laity alike at social justice at the expense of righteousness and holiness won't count for anything any longer.
Liberal - Progressive - Democrat: next to RINO those are three of the dirtest words I know.
More of the Church Suffering
Folks,
Over the past two or so years, every once in a while a certain person whom I know had been helping to teach apologetics at a certain local parish whose pastor has recently been changed. This new cleric (upon reading excerpts from the individual’s blogsite) told the senior apologetics instructor that the junior one was to no longer be allowed to have any more responsibility at that particular parish. The reason given had nothing to do with what the person taught during the apologetics session (which this cleric had never observed and so could not judge); rather, the reason apparently was the discomfort this cleric felt on reading the entries at that particular blogsite (which is entirely orthodox and conservative in nature). Obviously something pricked his conscience.
The cleric had neither the fortitude nor the courtesy to inform the dismissed person directly, but after all, it is the cleric’s parish with which to do as he desires. Yet some simple research has revealed (as expected) that this cleric is simply another in the continuing saga of liberal progressive clerics from academia that have dominated the Church in America after Vatican II. Indeed, for the past 50 years or so the Church in America and Western Europe has been plagued by the priestly sex abuse scandal, the USCCB support of Marxist groups through CCHD, the general withdrawal from orthodoxy, and the ascendency of the false gospel of social justice and peace at any price at the expense of the Gospel of conversion and repentance, righteousness and holiness. This is exactly why we today have the most godless President to ever rule America. And now the cleric goes about accusing parishioners (not just this junior instructor) of disobedience when there is none in spite of the fact they are the most holy and dedicated people whom he has, and of promoting their opposite – those ingratiating themselves with political power – with honor and respect. This is typical of liberal progressivism. And it is sad.
Nevertheless, some say that it is wrong to publicly criticize either priest or Church in such a forum as this. But to fail to point out in public who they are and what deeds they commit allows them to continue to persecute and divide the Body of Christ as they have for the past 50 years. Indeed, 1st Samuel 2:27-36 records how a man of God came to the priest Eli to warn him of what was going to happen to his two sons Hophni and Phineas because of their sins against the Lord. We do not know who this man of God was – his name is not given – but chapter 4 records the fulfillment of the promise and it was not pretty. What has happened in the Church in America for the past 50 years because of likeminded clerics is not pretty either. It is deplorable.
We need to pray for our priests and bishops. We need to pray that those who are orthodox are protected from the storms of persecution, and that those who are liberal repent of their liberalism. Michael Voris’ recent briefings The Church Suffering and Suffering Religious from Real Catholic TV are so apropos. Furthermore, these words are written not for the dismissed junior instructor. I am sure that individual is a big boy and can take care of himself. Rather, these words are written for those holy and dedicated parishioners left as sheep to be preyed upon by a wolf.
Over the past two or so years, every once in a while a certain person whom I know had been helping to teach apologetics at a certain local parish whose pastor has recently been changed. This new cleric (upon reading excerpts from the individual’s blogsite) told the senior apologetics instructor that the junior one was to no longer be allowed to have any more responsibility at that particular parish. The reason given had nothing to do with what the person taught during the apologetics session (which this cleric had never observed and so could not judge); rather, the reason apparently was the discomfort this cleric felt on reading the entries at that particular blogsite (which is entirely orthodox and conservative in nature). Obviously something pricked his conscience.
The cleric had neither the fortitude nor the courtesy to inform the dismissed person directly, but after all, it is the cleric’s parish with which to do as he desires. Yet some simple research has revealed (as expected) that this cleric is simply another in the continuing saga of liberal progressive clerics from academia that have dominated the Church in America after Vatican II. Indeed, for the past 50 years or so the Church in America and Western Europe has been plagued by the priestly sex abuse scandal, the USCCB support of Marxist groups through CCHD, the general withdrawal from orthodoxy, and the ascendency of the false gospel of social justice and peace at any price at the expense of the Gospel of conversion and repentance, righteousness and holiness. This is exactly why we today have the most godless President to ever rule America. And now the cleric goes about accusing parishioners (not just this junior instructor) of disobedience when there is none in spite of the fact they are the most holy and dedicated people whom he has, and of promoting their opposite – those ingratiating themselves with political power – with honor and respect. This is typical of liberal progressivism. And it is sad.
Nevertheless, some say that it is wrong to publicly criticize either priest or Church in such a forum as this. But to fail to point out in public who they are and what deeds they commit allows them to continue to persecute and divide the Body of Christ as they have for the past 50 years. Indeed, 1st Samuel 2:27-36 records how a man of God came to the priest Eli to warn him of what was going to happen to his two sons Hophni and Phineas because of their sins against the Lord. We do not know who this man of God was – his name is not given – but chapter 4 records the fulfillment of the promise and it was not pretty. What has happened in the Church in America for the past 50 years because of likeminded clerics is not pretty either. It is deplorable.
We need to pray for our priests and bishops. We need to pray that those who are orthodox are protected from the storms of persecution, and that those who are liberal repent of their liberalism. Michael Voris’ recent briefings The Church Suffering and Suffering Religious from Real Catholic TV are so apropos. Furthermore, these words are written not for the dismissed junior instructor. I am sure that individual is a big boy and can take care of himself. Rather, these words are written for those holy and dedicated parishioners left as sheep to be preyed upon by a wolf.
Sunday, September 26, 2010
Much Ado About “Nothing”: Stephen Hawking and the Self-Creating Universe
Folks,
I received the following article by physicist Stephen M. Barr from a Catholic Apologist at a sister church in the Wilmington, NC area. Please read and enjoy!
Much Ado About “Nothing”: Stephen Hawking and the Self-Creating Universe
Sep 10, 2010
Stephen M. Barr
Has physics done away with God? A newly release book by Stephen Hawking and Leonard Mlodinow says, “Yes.”
What is a Jewish or Christian believer to make of this? Is the Creator now out of a job? The short answer is (unsurprisingly) no: the ideas propounded in Hawking’s book constitute no threat whatever to the Jewish and Christian doctrine of Creation.
The idea that Hawking is now touting is not new—in fact, within the fast-moving world of modern physics it is fairly old. My first introduction to it was reading a very elegant theoretical paper entitled “Creation of Universes from Nothing,” written in 1982 by the noted cosmologist Alexander Vilenkin, who argued that our universe might have arisen by a “quantum fluctuation.”
This idea is sometimes referred to as the quantum creation of the universe. There are different variants, but the basic idea is well-known among particle physicists and cosmologists.
Right up front, it must be noted that this idea is extremely speculative, has not yet been formulated in a mathematically rigorous way, and is unable at this point to make any testable predictions. Indeed, it is very hard to imagine how it could ever be tested. It would be more accurate to call these “scenarios” than theories. It would be a mistake, however, for religious believers to dismiss these scenarios as mere fanciful conjecture or as motivated merely by atheist ideology. Based on a plausible analogy with the experimentally observed and well-understood phenomenon of the quantum creation of particles, the idea of quantum creation of universes is not without merit.
The salient point has to do with how quantum mechanics works. In quantum mechanics one always considers some physical “system”, which has various possible “quantum states”, and which is governed by certain well-defined “dynamical laws.” These dynamical laws that govern the particular system and the fundamental principles of quantum mechanics allow one to calculate the probability that the system will make a transition from one of its states to another. To take a simple example, the system might be an atom of hydrogen, and its states would be the different “energy levels” of the atom.
The highly speculative idea is that these ways of thinking can be applied to entire universes, which is what Hawking (and many others) have tried to do. For physicists (as opposed to theologians and metaphysicians) the concept of the universe does not refer to “all there is” or the “totality of things.” It refers to a single, self-contained physical structure, comprising a “spacetime manifold” and particles and other things moving around in that spacetime.
If one thinks of a universe as a particular structure, then one can imagine a multiplicity of universes, with universes coming into and going out of existence in various ways. For example, a new universe might split off from an already existing universe in a manner analogous to the way a small balloon can be “pinched off” from a larger balloon. Or one can imagine a universe starting off as a point of zero size (which is, in effect, no universe at all) and then growing continuously to some finite size.
By such processes, the number of universes can change. However, we need to keep in mind the special way in which physicists use the concept of “universe,” for these various universes are really features of a single overarching physical system—call it a “system of universes”. When the number of universes changes, it is because that single overarching system has undergone a transition from one of its “quantum states” to another. Such transitions are precisely governed by dynamical laws (assumed to include the laws of quantum mechanics). These laws would govern not only how many universes there were, but the characteristics of these universes, such as how many dimensions of space they could have and what kinds of matter and forces they could contain.
Some states of the system of universes would correspond to just one universe being in existence; others to two universes, and so on. And there would also be a state with no universe in existence. The dramatic possibility Hawking is considering (and many others before him) is that such a system might make a transition from its “no-universe state” to a state with one or more universes.
Would this be “creation” in the sense that theologians mean it? And in particular, would it be creation ex nihilo, creation from nothing?
The answer is no. First of all, one isn’t starting from “nothing.” The “no-universe state” as meant in these speculative scenarios is not nothing, it is a very definite something: it is one particular quantum state among many of an intricate rule-governed system. This no-universe state has specific properties and potentialities defined by a system of mathematical laws.
An analogy may help here. A checking account is a system that has many possible states: the zero-dollar state, the thousand-dollar state, the negative-thousand-dollar state (if one is overdrawn), the million-dollar state, etc. And this system can make transitions from one state to another. For instance, by a finance charge or by accruing interest. Even if your checking account happens to be in the zero-dollar state one day, the checking account is nevertheless still something definite and real—not “nothing.” It presupposes a bank, a monetary system, a contract between you and that bank—all being governed by various systems of rules.
Imagine the day on which your bank account balance is zero. Then imagine a deposit the next day that raises it to one thousand dollars. A quantum theory of the creation of a universe (in Hawking’s version, or Vilenkin’s, or anyone else’s) is akin to this transition from an empty account to one full of money. Obviously, therefore, the “nothing” that Hawking makes part of his theory of the creation of our universe is not nothing in a metaphysical sense. The “no-universe” of his speculations is like the “no-dollars” in my account. It exists within the framework of a complex overarching system with specific rules. So we can see that, if true, the way of thinking put forward by Hawking does not threaten the classical doctrine of creation out of nothing.
Perhaps my explanations are not really necessary. Even the most casual readers recognize that the cosmological theories put forward by Hawking do not bear upon larger questions that motivate classical views of creation out of nothing. Non-scientists are quick to ask the obvious questions. Why a system obeying quantum mechanics, M-theory, superstring theory, or whatever laws of physics that make scientific speculations possible in the first place? Why not no system at all, with no laws at all, no anything, just blank non-being?
Physics, by its very nature, cannot answer these questions. And the funny thing is that Hawking himself is perfectly aware of this. Indeed, he said it himself in a previous book! In A Brief History of Time, Hawking observed—quite correctly—that any theory of physics is “just a set of rules and equations.” And he asked, “What is it that breathes fire into the equations and makes a universe for them to describe? The usual approach of science of constructing a mathematical model cannot answer the question of why there should be a universe for the model to describe.” (Here he was using the word “universe” to mean what I called the “system of universes”: the entirety of physical reality described by the laws of physics.
Physics scenarios and theories are merely mathematical stories. They may be fictional or describe some reality. And just as the words of a book by themselves can’t tell you whether it’s fact or fiction—let alone have the power to make the world they describe real—so with the equations of a physics scenario. As Hawking once understood, equations may turn out to be an accurate description of some reality, but cannot not confer reality on the things they describe.
What Hawking called in his previous book the “usual approach of science” is in fact the only genuinely scientific approach. From the time Hawking wrote that earlier book until now, nothing has changed in this regard: theories of physics are still “just sets of rules and equations.”
There are two answers to the question: “Why does anything exist rather than nothing at all?” The atheist answers, “There is no explanation.” The theist replies, God. An intelligent case can be made for either answer. But to say that the laws of physics alone answer it is the purest nonsense—as Hawking himself once realized.
Stephen M. Barr is professor of physics at the University of Delaware and author of Modern Physics and Ancient Faith.
I received the following article by physicist Stephen M. Barr from a Catholic Apologist at a sister church in the Wilmington, NC area. Please read and enjoy!
Much Ado About “Nothing”: Stephen Hawking and the Self-Creating Universe
Sep 10, 2010
Stephen M. Barr
Has physics done away with God? A newly release book by Stephen Hawking and Leonard Mlodinow says, “Yes.”
What is a Jewish or Christian believer to make of this? Is the Creator now out of a job? The short answer is (unsurprisingly) no: the ideas propounded in Hawking’s book constitute no threat whatever to the Jewish and Christian doctrine of Creation.
The idea that Hawking is now touting is not new—in fact, within the fast-moving world of modern physics it is fairly old. My first introduction to it was reading a very elegant theoretical paper entitled “Creation of Universes from Nothing,” written in 1982 by the noted cosmologist Alexander Vilenkin, who argued that our universe might have arisen by a “quantum fluctuation.”
This idea is sometimes referred to as the quantum creation of the universe. There are different variants, but the basic idea is well-known among particle physicists and cosmologists.
Right up front, it must be noted that this idea is extremely speculative, has not yet been formulated in a mathematically rigorous way, and is unable at this point to make any testable predictions. Indeed, it is very hard to imagine how it could ever be tested. It would be more accurate to call these “scenarios” than theories. It would be a mistake, however, for religious believers to dismiss these scenarios as mere fanciful conjecture or as motivated merely by atheist ideology. Based on a plausible analogy with the experimentally observed and well-understood phenomenon of the quantum creation of particles, the idea of quantum creation of universes is not without merit.
The salient point has to do with how quantum mechanics works. In quantum mechanics one always considers some physical “system”, which has various possible “quantum states”, and which is governed by certain well-defined “dynamical laws.” These dynamical laws that govern the particular system and the fundamental principles of quantum mechanics allow one to calculate the probability that the system will make a transition from one of its states to another. To take a simple example, the system might be an atom of hydrogen, and its states would be the different “energy levels” of the atom.
The highly speculative idea is that these ways of thinking can be applied to entire universes, which is what Hawking (and many others) have tried to do. For physicists (as opposed to theologians and metaphysicians) the concept of the universe does not refer to “all there is” or the “totality of things.” It refers to a single, self-contained physical structure, comprising a “spacetime manifold” and particles and other things moving around in that spacetime.
If one thinks of a universe as a particular structure, then one can imagine a multiplicity of universes, with universes coming into and going out of existence in various ways. For example, a new universe might split off from an already existing universe in a manner analogous to the way a small balloon can be “pinched off” from a larger balloon. Or one can imagine a universe starting off as a point of zero size (which is, in effect, no universe at all) and then growing continuously to some finite size.
By such processes, the number of universes can change. However, we need to keep in mind the special way in which physicists use the concept of “universe,” for these various universes are really features of a single overarching physical system—call it a “system of universes”. When the number of universes changes, it is because that single overarching system has undergone a transition from one of its “quantum states” to another. Such transitions are precisely governed by dynamical laws (assumed to include the laws of quantum mechanics). These laws would govern not only how many universes there were, but the characteristics of these universes, such as how many dimensions of space they could have and what kinds of matter and forces they could contain.
Some states of the system of universes would correspond to just one universe being in existence; others to two universes, and so on. And there would also be a state with no universe in existence. The dramatic possibility Hawking is considering (and many others before him) is that such a system might make a transition from its “no-universe state” to a state with one or more universes.
Would this be “creation” in the sense that theologians mean it? And in particular, would it be creation ex nihilo, creation from nothing?
The answer is no. First of all, one isn’t starting from “nothing.” The “no-universe state” as meant in these speculative scenarios is not nothing, it is a very definite something: it is one particular quantum state among many of an intricate rule-governed system. This no-universe state has specific properties and potentialities defined by a system of mathematical laws.
An analogy may help here. A checking account is a system that has many possible states: the zero-dollar state, the thousand-dollar state, the negative-thousand-dollar state (if one is overdrawn), the million-dollar state, etc. And this system can make transitions from one state to another. For instance, by a finance charge or by accruing interest. Even if your checking account happens to be in the zero-dollar state one day, the checking account is nevertheless still something definite and real—not “nothing.” It presupposes a bank, a monetary system, a contract between you and that bank—all being governed by various systems of rules.
Imagine the day on which your bank account balance is zero. Then imagine a deposit the next day that raises it to one thousand dollars. A quantum theory of the creation of a universe (in Hawking’s version, or Vilenkin’s, or anyone else’s) is akin to this transition from an empty account to one full of money. Obviously, therefore, the “nothing” that Hawking makes part of his theory of the creation of our universe is not nothing in a metaphysical sense. The “no-universe” of his speculations is like the “no-dollars” in my account. It exists within the framework of a complex overarching system with specific rules. So we can see that, if true, the way of thinking put forward by Hawking does not threaten the classical doctrine of creation out of nothing.
Perhaps my explanations are not really necessary. Even the most casual readers recognize that the cosmological theories put forward by Hawking do not bear upon larger questions that motivate classical views of creation out of nothing. Non-scientists are quick to ask the obvious questions. Why a system obeying quantum mechanics, M-theory, superstring theory, or whatever laws of physics that make scientific speculations possible in the first place? Why not no system at all, with no laws at all, no anything, just blank non-being?
Physics, by its very nature, cannot answer these questions. And the funny thing is that Hawking himself is perfectly aware of this. Indeed, he said it himself in a previous book! In A Brief History of Time, Hawking observed—quite correctly—that any theory of physics is “just a set of rules and equations.” And he asked, “What is it that breathes fire into the equations and makes a universe for them to describe? The usual approach of science of constructing a mathematical model cannot answer the question of why there should be a universe for the model to describe.” (Here he was using the word “universe” to mean what I called the “system of universes”: the entirety of physical reality described by the laws of physics.
Physics scenarios and theories are merely mathematical stories. They may be fictional or describe some reality. And just as the words of a book by themselves can’t tell you whether it’s fact or fiction—let alone have the power to make the world they describe real—so with the equations of a physics scenario. As Hawking once understood, equations may turn out to be an accurate description of some reality, but cannot not confer reality on the things they describe.
What Hawking called in his previous book the “usual approach of science” is in fact the only genuinely scientific approach. From the time Hawking wrote that earlier book until now, nothing has changed in this regard: theories of physics are still “just sets of rules and equations.”
There are two answers to the question: “Why does anything exist rather than nothing at all?” The atheist answers, “There is no explanation.” The theist replies, God. An intelligent case can be made for either answer. But to say that the laws of physics alone answer it is the purest nonsense—as Hawking himself once realized.
Stephen M. Barr is professor of physics at the University of Delaware and author of Modern Physics and Ancient Faith.
Mickey Mouse?
Folks,
The following commentary from Dr. Pournelle at Chaos Manor deserves to be repeated in full here. I am as sick of the Creeps in the Republican Party as I am of the Nuts in the Democratic Party (which now is nothing other than the Party of Death).
Mickey Mouse?
The following commentary from Dr. Pournelle at Chaos Manor deserves to be repeated in full here. I am as sick of the Creeps in the Republican Party as I am of the Nuts in the Democratic Party (which now is nothing other than the Party of Death).
Mickey Mouse?
A few readers have asked if it is a bit extreme to say I'd prefer a Republican Mickey Mouse to a democrat this year. I understand the question. It is not something I would normally say. The nation is safest when we can entrust either party with power, and one might prefer a good man from the opposite party to a buffoon from his own. I do not think these are such times. The Pelosi wing of the Democratic Party is so thoroughly entrenched that the only way the leadership can change will be a thorough humiliation of the Democrats, something comparable to the thumping the Republicans got in 2008.
There is still a struggle within the Republican Party over who shall have the greater influence, the new Taxed Enough populist movement in alliance with the old Conservative/Libertarian Wing, or the Country Club faction that was instrumental in putting the Creeps in charge after the resignation of Speaker Gingrich. The primaries are over now, to the disappointment of many of the old Country Club candidates were defeated. Not all of the new candidates are the people I would have chosen, but the important thing is that the Republicans be elected. That will force a change in leadership and a sharing of political influence, a step toward purging the Republicans of the Creeps and a permanent diminishing of tendencies toward nonsense such as "big government Conservatism." That is an important thing to accomplish, and the larger the Republican victory after this Summer the more influence the Taxed Enough Already movement will have. Moreover, success breeds success, and with luck the Tea Party movement will itself be subject to some changes as those who wish for Self Government understand that for self government to work there must be reasonable numbers of people willing to govern themselves.
The larger the Republican victory in this election, the larger the chance of real leadership changes in both parties. We have rejected the Creeps. We now need to reject the Nuts. When that's accomplished we can get down to the serious business of rebuilding the leadership in both parties to reflect the principles that built this republic. I am as interested in the salutary effect on the Democrats of a big loss as I am in any positive results a Republican majority could accomplish over the next two years.
Archbishop John Nienstedt Defending Marriage
Folks,
Archbishop John Nienstedt of St. Paul and Minneapolis has released a video, in which he explains how new definitions of marriage could (and will if enacted) seriously harm society.
Archbishop John Nienstedt Defending Marriage
Archbishop John Nienstedt of St. Paul and Minneapolis has released a video, in which he explains how new definitions of marriage could (and will if enacted) seriously harm society.
Archbishop John Nienstedt Defending Marriage
Saturday, September 25, 2010
A Reader's Foul Mouthed Comments on "The Sexual Person" Post
Folks,
An anonymous reader made some foul-mouthed comments (that were rejected) on this previous week's post entitled "The Sexual Person". He accused both Michael Voris of Real Catholic TV (who had never commented on the book from academia that the USCCB has rightly condemned) and myself of self-hatred. Apparently the anonymous commenter attributes to any man crticizing homosexual actions a simultaneous condition of same sex attraction, self-denial and self-hatred.
Well, let the truth be known: my problems with lust are over the opposite sex and I have no denial of that, nor do I hate myself because of my humanity in such things. Now if I had a problem with lusting after the same sex, then I would say so. But fortunately for me, that's not my problem. What is my problem is lusting after the opposite sex. Therefore, with all due respect to the ladies, I am still a man, fleeting thoughts occur to me, and sometimes I dwell on what I ought not to dwell on. When that happens, then I seek out Confession. I won't belabor the point with salacious details that serve only to tickle the ear and inspire thoughts of immodesty, impiety and impurity.
So to this anonymous commenter, no, I am not a closet homosexual. Nor do I hate homosexuals. But like 99.99999% of the rest of humanity, I too have sexual problems (if only within my own mind). I am fortunate however that God has kept me away from the physical act of adultery and fornication, and whether by accident of genetics or programming of environment, has likewise kept me free of same sex attraction. That is a Cross probably too heavy for me to carry.
I guess that I just don't "get it". Why do liberals have to believe that a person would only oppose homosexual behavior if he himself were a closet homosexual in denial? True, I got problems, lots of problems, but not that particular one.
An anonymous reader made some foul-mouthed comments (that were rejected) on this previous week's post entitled "The Sexual Person". He accused both Michael Voris of Real Catholic TV (who had never commented on the book from academia that the USCCB has rightly condemned) and myself of self-hatred. Apparently the anonymous commenter attributes to any man crticizing homosexual actions a simultaneous condition of same sex attraction, self-denial and self-hatred.
Well, let the truth be known: my problems with lust are over the opposite sex and I have no denial of that, nor do I hate myself because of my humanity in such things. Now if I had a problem with lusting after the same sex, then I would say so. But fortunately for me, that's not my problem. What is my problem is lusting after the opposite sex. Therefore, with all due respect to the ladies, I am still a man, fleeting thoughts occur to me, and sometimes I dwell on what I ought not to dwell on. When that happens, then I seek out Confession. I won't belabor the point with salacious details that serve only to tickle the ear and inspire thoughts of immodesty, impiety and impurity.
So to this anonymous commenter, no, I am not a closet homosexual. Nor do I hate homosexuals. But like 99.99999% of the rest of humanity, I too have sexual problems (if only within my own mind). I am fortunate however that God has kept me away from the physical act of adultery and fornication, and whether by accident of genetics or programming of environment, has likewise kept me free of same sex attraction. That is a Cross probably too heavy for me to carry.
I guess that I just don't "get it". Why do liberals have to believe that a person would only oppose homosexual behavior if he himself were a closet homosexual in denial? True, I got problems, lots of problems, but not that particular one.
Effective vs. Ineffective Prayer by Jim McCrea
Effective vs. Ineffective Prayer
By Jim J. McCrea
I have had experiences in my life of unanswered prayers and bitterness towards God over certain serious situations.
But at other times, I have had the most wonderful answers to prayer and have seen God's power work in the most striking way.
What is the difference?
To know the difference between prayer that does not work and prayer that does work, we have to understand what prayer is. I have learned this from experience and God's grace.
First of all, prayer is not a formula to get God to do what you want - to say so many Hail Marys and you will get such and such a result. Forget all those publications that say that if you say this novena in such and such a way, and then publish the success of your prayer, you will get an answer to what you want infallibly.
Prayer is in essence an opening of our hearts to God. The essence of prayer is heart to heart commune with God. All our rituals and formal prayers are only a means to that end. Real prayer is to become so united with God that we know what His will is, so that we can so much more effectively pray.
Of course we ask that God grant us our needs in prayers of petition. God has specifically instructed us to do that. That type of prayer is not a "force" we apply to God to make Him change His mind. People make this mistake in praying Rosary after Rosary in an attitude of applying sufficient "prayer power" to get God to do what they want. Such prayer is generally not answered. Such prayer can actually lead to greater problems in life.
If that is not the prayer of petition, then what is?
The prayer of petition is an opening of our hearts to God so that He can give us what He desires to give us. That may involve prayer in our own words, or something more formal like the Rosary. But the most important thing in such a prayer is not the words we say or the rituals we act out (apart from our duties as Catholics in obedience to the Church or other lawful superiors), but the attitude of heart we adopt. We must adopt the attitude: "I seem to need this Lord, but you know what is best, so answer the prayer in the way you see fit." Such prayer is done quietly and confident in the Lord's power and love, rather than rattling it off quickly and fretfully as if the Lord is deaf and reluctant (arm twisting prayer).
"Arm twisting" prayer can make things worse in a person's life because it is but another way of asserting one's own will over God's. Even thought it seems to be prayer, it can actually shut God out. Correct words alone do not make for real prayer. Prayer is a matter of the heart. If the lips are saying "thy will be done" but the heart is saying "my will be done," it is not real prayer and is not pleasing to God.
Even though the Lord can give us anything without asking and He knows all of our needs, He still wants us to ask Him for what we need. This is because doing that instills a sense of dependence on His providence thus facilitating union with Him. Union with God is the end of all prayer.
Of course, we can never get all that we want in life and cannot be relieved of all suffering in this life. The prayer of petition can never be directed to that end, but only to the carrying out of God's will - a will that leads to peace in this life, the supplying of all of our real needs, and perfect and eternal happiness in heaven.
By Jim J. McCrea
I have had experiences in my life of unanswered prayers and bitterness towards God over certain serious situations.
But at other times, I have had the most wonderful answers to prayer and have seen God's power work in the most striking way.
What is the difference?
To know the difference between prayer that does not work and prayer that does work, we have to understand what prayer is. I have learned this from experience and God's grace.
First of all, prayer is not a formula to get God to do what you want - to say so many Hail Marys and you will get such and such a result. Forget all those publications that say that if you say this novena in such and such a way, and then publish the success of your prayer, you will get an answer to what you want infallibly.
Prayer is in essence an opening of our hearts to God. The essence of prayer is heart to heart commune with God. All our rituals and formal prayers are only a means to that end. Real prayer is to become so united with God that we know what His will is, so that we can so much more effectively pray.
Of course we ask that God grant us our needs in prayers of petition. God has specifically instructed us to do that. That type of prayer is not a "force" we apply to God to make Him change His mind. People make this mistake in praying Rosary after Rosary in an attitude of applying sufficient "prayer power" to get God to do what they want. Such prayer is generally not answered. Such prayer can actually lead to greater problems in life.
If that is not the prayer of petition, then what is?
The prayer of petition is an opening of our hearts to God so that He can give us what He desires to give us. That may involve prayer in our own words, or something more formal like the Rosary. But the most important thing in such a prayer is not the words we say or the rituals we act out (apart from our duties as Catholics in obedience to the Church or other lawful superiors), but the attitude of heart we adopt. We must adopt the attitude: "I seem to need this Lord, but you know what is best, so answer the prayer in the way you see fit." Such prayer is done quietly and confident in the Lord's power and love, rather than rattling it off quickly and fretfully as if the Lord is deaf and reluctant (arm twisting prayer).
"Arm twisting" prayer can make things worse in a person's life because it is but another way of asserting one's own will over God's. Even thought it seems to be prayer, it can actually shut God out. Correct words alone do not make for real prayer. Prayer is a matter of the heart. If the lips are saying "thy will be done" but the heart is saying "my will be done," it is not real prayer and is not pleasing to God.
Even though the Lord can give us anything without asking and He knows all of our needs, He still wants us to ask Him for what we need. This is because doing that instills a sense of dependence on His providence thus facilitating union with Him. Union with God is the end of all prayer.
Of course, we can never get all that we want in life and cannot be relieved of all suffering in this life. The prayer of petition can never be directed to that end, but only to the carrying out of God's will - a will that leads to peace in this life, the supplying of all of our real needs, and perfect and eternal happiness in heaven.
Friday, September 24, 2010
The Three Ways of the Spiritual Life By Jim J. McCrea
The Three Ways of the Spiritual Life
By Jim J. McCrea
We are all born with the impurity and effects of original sin and many of us have fouled our souls with considerable personal sin as well. However, to be fit for heaven, we must be absolutely pure. Nothing tainted shall enter paradise (Rev 21:27). For those to be saved, this life is a purification process to prepare us for heaven. If the job is not completed in this life, that is what purgatory is for. This is in contrast to the doctrine of classical Protestantism which views Christ's justification of the believer by his faith as snow covering a manure pile. According to that, if we believe we are as corrupt as ever underneath, but the Father sees only Christ's purity covering us, so considers us pure. With the Catholic view, on the other hand, we must really be made pure, through and through. With classical Protestantism, Christ's justification is a fiction that God creates on our behalf. We are considered pure, while in reality we are not. With the Catholic understanding, that we must really be made pure, God deals in realities. God sees us pure in the end because we actually are pure. It makes more sense that God works with realities rather than with fictions, because God is Infinite Reality Itself. God is Truth Itself, and cannot declare that something is, when in fact it is not.
Mystical Theologians, such as St. John of the Cross, have described the climb up the spiritual ladder, for those working for perfection. In the climb, not one but three conversions have been enumerated. The first conversion is from sin to God, and the other two are successively more radical turnings to God.
The first conversion may be either in one's baptism, or in the case of falling into a life of sin after baptism, a turning from that life of sin to God. The soul in mortal sin is alienated from God. Such a soul is dead because it does not have God dwelling in it as its life-giving principle. When it converts, it comes to life because it has God's supernatural grace and charity dwelling within it. It is now a heir to heaven as opposed to when it was in mortal sin, in which case if the person died in that state, his or her soul would have gone to hell for eternity.
However, with this conversion, the process of purification has just begun. Even though in a state of grace, the soul has many vicious and sinful habits and tendencies contrary to the goodness and purity of God. This soul is in the stage of *beginners.* To enter heaven, these habits and tendencies must eventually be gotten rid of. For a soul serious in pleasing God and making progress, God then begins to go to work on the soul. He first sends spiritual consolations and delights to the soul to attract it to Him and away from the delights of sin. Since the soul experiences such joy in the things of God, it may be deceived into thinking that it has reached a high level of holiness. In fact, the work of holiness in the soul has hardly begun. The problem is, the soul may be loving God for the delights he sends, not for His own sake. True sanctity is loving God above all things for His own sake, and the will of God in all things, no matter how pleasant or unpleasant. This requires such a supreme degree of purity, that many sincerely pious people with years of practicing devotion have not yet achieved it.
Some time after the first conversion, God plunges the soul into the *dark night of the senses,* where spiritual delights are taken away and replaced with suffering. God is thus training the soul to love Him for His own sake and not for the sake of the pleasure that God brings to the soul. If the soul accepts this and clings to God in spite of hardship, it has undergone a second conversion. Its love has been proved to be much more pure and disinterested. It has made a significant advance in holiness. Then it exits the dark night and enters the stage of *illumination.* Joy has then returned. The delights in God are much more subtle and it practices virtue with much more facility. In the stage of beginners the spiritual delights have a relatively gross nature, and are very much akin to natural positive emotions. Those who are "all fired up in the spirit" and emotional at pentecostal rallies, are actually at a very low stage of prayer. In illumination the soul is much more steady in its practice of virtue and its trust in God in spite of various ups and downs in life. Its joy is at a much deeper and more spiritual level. It is much more likely to be experienced as deep peace before the Blessed Sacrament or when saying the Rosary than in emotional outbursts. Here, it is much more firmly anchored to the Rock.
But in the stage of illumination, the soul is still far from being perfected. The very bottom of the soul is still impure. It is practicing great virtue, but often there is a very subtle and deep egotism operating as well. It may see itself as better than the common run of humanity for its own virtues and spiritual progress. It has a pride that it is generally not conscious of. The soul may be deluded into believing that it has reached the peak of perfection. As a result, to correct this, God sends a much more painful night than that of the senses. The soul then enters the *dark night of the spirit.* As the night of the senses purifies the sensitive levels of the soul, the night of the spirit purifies the deepest spiritual levels of it. In the dark night of the senses, it was the imperfect that was taken away. In this night of the spirit, it seems as though what is perfect is being removed. God devastates the intellect and the will, and deprives the soul of active virtue. This night is very painful because God is contradicting that hard core of egoism and independence from God which exists at the center of the soul. As a result, the soul could be strongly tempted to blaspheme at this stage. This dark night is sometimes referred to as "mystical death."
Once this hard core of egoism is broken, God's supernatural light and power can be diffused throughout the entire soul. When this has happened, the soul has undergone a third conversion and has entered the stage of *union.* God is so united to the soul in this stage, he animates its faculties directly. Before this, it was a matter of an imperfect organism attempting to do God's will as it saw it, through mainly its own power. The soul at that time applied reason with will power, exercising the infused virtues of prudence, justice, temperance, and fortitude, along with the theological virtues of faith, hope, and charity. Now, in the stage of union, God moves the faculties Himself, through the gifts of the Holy Spirit of wisdom, understanding, knowledge, counsel, fortitude, piety, and fear of the Lord. The soul now is mainly passive, while God is mainly active. But the soul's powers are greater than ever here. The faculties are divine rather than human now - the faculties of intellect, will, memory, and spiritual affectivity. One in the stage of union has far greater efficacy in advancing God's kingdom and retarding satan's, than in the previous stages. Here, the joy is so subtle and pure, that it is a feeling beyond feeling. St. John of the Cross says that in this stage a single work done by the soul has more value than all the works done before combined.
By Jim J. McCrea
We are all born with the impurity and effects of original sin and many of us have fouled our souls with considerable personal sin as well. However, to be fit for heaven, we must be absolutely pure. Nothing tainted shall enter paradise (Rev 21:27). For those to be saved, this life is a purification process to prepare us for heaven. If the job is not completed in this life, that is what purgatory is for. This is in contrast to the doctrine of classical Protestantism which views Christ's justification of the believer by his faith as snow covering a manure pile. According to that, if we believe we are as corrupt as ever underneath, but the Father sees only Christ's purity covering us, so considers us pure. With the Catholic view, on the other hand, we must really be made pure, through and through. With classical Protestantism, Christ's justification is a fiction that God creates on our behalf. We are considered pure, while in reality we are not. With the Catholic understanding, that we must really be made pure, God deals in realities. God sees us pure in the end because we actually are pure. It makes more sense that God works with realities rather than with fictions, because God is Infinite Reality Itself. God is Truth Itself, and cannot declare that something is, when in fact it is not.
Mystical Theologians, such as St. John of the Cross, have described the climb up the spiritual ladder, for those working for perfection. In the climb, not one but three conversions have been enumerated. The first conversion is from sin to God, and the other two are successively more radical turnings to God.
The first conversion may be either in one's baptism, or in the case of falling into a life of sin after baptism, a turning from that life of sin to God. The soul in mortal sin is alienated from God. Such a soul is dead because it does not have God dwelling in it as its life-giving principle. When it converts, it comes to life because it has God's supernatural grace and charity dwelling within it. It is now a heir to heaven as opposed to when it was in mortal sin, in which case if the person died in that state, his or her soul would have gone to hell for eternity.
However, with this conversion, the process of purification has just begun. Even though in a state of grace, the soul has many vicious and sinful habits and tendencies contrary to the goodness and purity of God. This soul is in the stage of *beginners.* To enter heaven, these habits and tendencies must eventually be gotten rid of. For a soul serious in pleasing God and making progress, God then begins to go to work on the soul. He first sends spiritual consolations and delights to the soul to attract it to Him and away from the delights of sin. Since the soul experiences such joy in the things of God, it may be deceived into thinking that it has reached a high level of holiness. In fact, the work of holiness in the soul has hardly begun. The problem is, the soul may be loving God for the delights he sends, not for His own sake. True sanctity is loving God above all things for His own sake, and the will of God in all things, no matter how pleasant or unpleasant. This requires such a supreme degree of purity, that many sincerely pious people with years of practicing devotion have not yet achieved it.
Some time after the first conversion, God plunges the soul into the *dark night of the senses,* where spiritual delights are taken away and replaced with suffering. God is thus training the soul to love Him for His own sake and not for the sake of the pleasure that God brings to the soul. If the soul accepts this and clings to God in spite of hardship, it has undergone a second conversion. Its love has been proved to be much more pure and disinterested. It has made a significant advance in holiness. Then it exits the dark night and enters the stage of *illumination.* Joy has then returned. The delights in God are much more subtle and it practices virtue with much more facility. In the stage of beginners the spiritual delights have a relatively gross nature, and are very much akin to natural positive emotions. Those who are "all fired up in the spirit" and emotional at pentecostal rallies, are actually at a very low stage of prayer. In illumination the soul is much more steady in its practice of virtue and its trust in God in spite of various ups and downs in life. Its joy is at a much deeper and more spiritual level. It is much more likely to be experienced as deep peace before the Blessed Sacrament or when saying the Rosary than in emotional outbursts. Here, it is much more firmly anchored to the Rock.
But in the stage of illumination, the soul is still far from being perfected. The very bottom of the soul is still impure. It is practicing great virtue, but often there is a very subtle and deep egotism operating as well. It may see itself as better than the common run of humanity for its own virtues and spiritual progress. It has a pride that it is generally not conscious of. The soul may be deluded into believing that it has reached the peak of perfection. As a result, to correct this, God sends a much more painful night than that of the senses. The soul then enters the *dark night of the spirit.* As the night of the senses purifies the sensitive levels of the soul, the night of the spirit purifies the deepest spiritual levels of it. In the dark night of the senses, it was the imperfect that was taken away. In this night of the spirit, it seems as though what is perfect is being removed. God devastates the intellect and the will, and deprives the soul of active virtue. This night is very painful because God is contradicting that hard core of egoism and independence from God which exists at the center of the soul. As a result, the soul could be strongly tempted to blaspheme at this stage. This dark night is sometimes referred to as "mystical death."
Once this hard core of egoism is broken, God's supernatural light and power can be diffused throughout the entire soul. When this has happened, the soul has undergone a third conversion and has entered the stage of *union.* God is so united to the soul in this stage, he animates its faculties directly. Before this, it was a matter of an imperfect organism attempting to do God's will as it saw it, through mainly its own power. The soul at that time applied reason with will power, exercising the infused virtues of prudence, justice, temperance, and fortitude, along with the theological virtues of faith, hope, and charity. Now, in the stage of union, God moves the faculties Himself, through the gifts of the Holy Spirit of wisdom, understanding, knowledge, counsel, fortitude, piety, and fear of the Lord. The soul now is mainly passive, while God is mainly active. But the soul's powers are greater than ever here. The faculties are divine rather than human now - the faculties of intellect, will, memory, and spiritual affectivity. One in the stage of union has far greater efficacy in advancing God's kingdom and retarding satan's, than in the previous stages. Here, the joy is so subtle and pure, that it is a feeling beyond feeling. St. John of the Cross says that in this stage a single work done by the soul has more value than all the works done before combined.
Catholic and Homosexual
Folks,
As Michael Voris of Real Catholic TV points out, homosexual persons who accept and obey the teachings of the Church, who remain chaste and celibate, and who lead lives of righteousness and holiness, carry a Cross that most of us could never fathom or bear ourselves. Yes, this is written in marked stark contrast to yesterday's post, "The Sexual Person". There is, however, a significant difference between the theological professors in Academia or the militant gay activitists in the Democratic Party who cannot (or will not) discern what is normal and abnormal, and the tortured soul of the homosexual Christian seeking to remain faithful to the Gospel message in spite of uncontrollable internal urges from mind and body to the contrary, and uncontrolled external exhortations from secular society to the contrary. May God bless these souls who silently live out the road to Golgotha in their daily lives.
Catholic & Homosexual
As Michael Voris of Real Catholic TV points out, homosexual persons who accept and obey the teachings of the Church, who remain chaste and celibate, and who lead lives of righteousness and holiness, carry a Cross that most of us could never fathom or bear ourselves. Yes, this is written in marked stark contrast to yesterday's post, "The Sexual Person". There is, however, a significant difference between the theological professors in Academia or the militant gay activitists in the Democratic Party who cannot (or will not) discern what is normal and abnormal, and the tortured soul of the homosexual Christian seeking to remain faithful to the Gospel message in spite of uncontrollable internal urges from mind and body to the contrary, and uncontrolled external exhortations from secular society to the contrary. May God bless these souls who silently live out the road to Golgotha in their daily lives.
Catholic & Homosexual
Eternal Vigilance
Folks,
Dr. Pournelle's entry of yesterday on Eternal Vigilance at his Chaos Manor web site deserves being repeated in full here. Whatever it takes this autumn, vote against the godless, wicked Democrats.
Rush Limbaugh today speaks of the new poll on "The American Dream". We are down to about half the people believing that "the American Dream" is over; it was once true, but is no longer. I suspect that's unduly pessimistic, but it's significant.
The very idea of freedom and liberty as a goal is under attack; the new goal is the liberal notion of an elite that sets goals which people are required to follow for their own good. It is this substitution of goals that must be stopped; which means that the education system which produced it must be either changed or abolished.
We went through all this before in the Carter Administration. Recovery is possible. We were transformed when the Carter era ended, and in those days the Soviet Union with its 26,000 deliverable warheads was a real threat.
I am not an uncritical fan of Limbaugh, but I think today's monologue had merit. Reagan gave us reason to be proud of America and gave new hope that freedom would be valuable. The current administration encourages dependence on entitlements. An entitlement society will necessarily be both structured and fairly rigid in composition. One can join the entitlements at the cost of freedom. That was not the American way in my youth.
One significant quote from Victor Davis Hanson: "We are all getting poorer in the hopes that we can prevent some from getting richer." This is worth reflecting on. Would we prefer to be poorer but equal if that is the price of equality?
I remind you as I have in the past. Free people are not equal. Equal people are not free. And eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.
Dr. Pournelle's entry of yesterday on Eternal Vigilance at his Chaos Manor web site deserves being repeated in full here. Whatever it takes this autumn, vote against the godless, wicked Democrats.
Rush Limbaugh today speaks of the new poll on "The American Dream". We are down to about half the people believing that "the American Dream" is over; it was once true, but is no longer. I suspect that's unduly pessimistic, but it's significant.
The very idea of freedom and liberty as a goal is under attack; the new goal is the liberal notion of an elite that sets goals which people are required to follow for their own good. It is this substitution of goals that must be stopped; which means that the education system which produced it must be either changed or abolished.
We went through all this before in the Carter Administration. Recovery is possible. We were transformed when the Carter era ended, and in those days the Soviet Union with its 26,000 deliverable warheads was a real threat.
I am not an uncritical fan of Limbaugh, but I think today's monologue had merit. Reagan gave us reason to be proud of America and gave new hope that freedom would be valuable. The current administration encourages dependence on entitlements. An entitlement society will necessarily be both structured and fairly rigid in composition. One can join the entitlements at the cost of freedom. That was not the American way in my youth.
One significant quote from Victor Davis Hanson: "We are all getting poorer in the hopes that we can prevent some from getting richer." This is worth reflecting on. Would we prefer to be poorer but equal if that is the price of equality?
I remind you as I have in the past. Free people are not equal. Equal people are not free. And eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.
Catholic Answers
Folks,
Michael Voris' latest installment from Real Catholic TV is provided below:
Catholic Answers
"When it comes to the problems of the world, the only lasting solutions are Catholic."
Michael Voris' latest installment from Real Catholic TV is provided below:
Catholic Answers
"When it comes to the problems of the world, the only lasting solutions are Catholic."
Thursday, September 23, 2010
The Sexual Person
Folks,
I am happy to report that the USCCB is from time to time capable of performing its teaching duties with distinction. The present example is the case of its condemnation of a book by Creighton University professors Todd Salzman and Michael Lawler, The Sexual Person: Toward a Renewed Catholic Anthropology. We all know that homosexual acts, adultery, fornication and masterbation are all intriniscally wrong and what is right, natural and correct is the sanctity of the Sacrament of Marriage. But once again, liberal progressive relativists in Academia think that they can manipulate the Bible into re-interpreting what is normal and correct. More information can be obtained at:
Bishops’ Doctrine Committee Says Book By Creighton University Professors Conflicts With Catholic Teaching On Sexuality
The actual 24-page statement from the USCCB can be found at:
INADEQUACIES IN THE THEOLOGICAL METHODOLOGY AND CONCLUSIONS OF THE SEXUAL PERSON: TOWARD A RENEWED CATHOLIC ANTHROPOLOGY BY TODD A. SALZMAN AND MICHAEL G. LAWLER
These two "educated-into-imbecility" college professors obviously can't discern that a man sticking his reproductive organ into the mouth or anal orifice of another man is not just abnormal, but sickening and disgusting. I'll therefore wager that both are proudly members of Barack Hussein Obama's Democratic Party of Death.
Oh, I forgot to add something. These foolish excuses for college professors argue that since homosexuality is normal for persons with same sex attraction (hey, they were born that way), then obviously there is nothing wrong with homosexuality. Well, being a seral murderer or rapist is normal for those deviants, so why is what they do wrong? I see no difference between the two for both are examples of intrinsic evil.
I am happy to report that the USCCB is from time to time capable of performing its teaching duties with distinction. The present example is the case of its condemnation of a book by Creighton University professors Todd Salzman and Michael Lawler, The Sexual Person: Toward a Renewed Catholic Anthropology. We all know that homosexual acts, adultery, fornication and masterbation are all intriniscally wrong and what is right, natural and correct is the sanctity of the Sacrament of Marriage. But once again, liberal progressive relativists in Academia think that they can manipulate the Bible into re-interpreting what is normal and correct. More information can be obtained at:
Bishops’ Doctrine Committee Says Book By Creighton University Professors Conflicts With Catholic Teaching On Sexuality
The actual 24-page statement from the USCCB can be found at:
INADEQUACIES IN THE THEOLOGICAL METHODOLOGY AND CONCLUSIONS OF THE SEXUAL PERSON: TOWARD A RENEWED CATHOLIC ANTHROPOLOGY BY TODD A. SALZMAN AND MICHAEL G. LAWLER
These two "educated-into-imbecility" college professors obviously can't discern that a man sticking his reproductive organ into the mouth or anal orifice of another man is not just abnormal, but sickening and disgusting. I'll therefore wager that both are proudly members of Barack Hussein Obama's Democratic Party of Death.
Oh, I forgot to add something. These foolish excuses for college professors argue that since homosexuality is normal for persons with same sex attraction (hey, they were born that way), then obviously there is nothing wrong with homosexuality. Well, being a seral murderer or rapist is normal for those deviants, so why is what they do wrong? I see no difference between the two for both are examples of intrinsic evil.
Wednesday, September 22, 2010
Suffering Religious
Folks,
From Michael Voris of Real Catholic TV:
Suffering Religious
"The suffering that many religious (priests, bishops, nuns) endure at the hands of others in the Church is sometimes severe and always un-Christlike."
From Michael Voris of Real Catholic TV:
Suffering Religious
"The suffering that many religious (priests, bishops, nuns) endure at the hands of others in the Church is sometimes severe and always un-Christlike."
The Dream Act - More Enabling of Illegal Immigration
Folks,
Today the Bishops of North Carolina issued a statement urging the Faithful to support the "Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors" Act, having the acronym "DREAM". This act would authorize the State to provide tuition out of the teat of the public treasury to illegal immigrant minors for their education.
The Bishops use words such as "undocumented immigrant students." That term is merely a euphemism to the actual status of such people: they are illegal immigrants. However laudable it is to educate young people, taking money from the tax-paying legal citizenry and diverting it to illegal immigrants is always and everywhere immoral. It is in a word stealing.
What however is even worse than taking money from the tax payer and redistributing it to those who don't pay taxes is making these people become dependent on largess from the public treasury. That only encourages more illegal immigration, and more slavery of Hispanics to rich white liberal Democrat gringoes who don't themselves want to do the dirty work of harvesting at farms and house keeping in rich neighborhoods. I shall now contact Senators Richard Burr and .Kay Hagan to put an end to illegal immigration in order to stop creating a slave labor environment that imprisons instead of liberating Hispanics. Illegal immigrants of whatever country need to return to their nation of origin.
One last thing: why is this bill so targeted for the ostensible benefit of Hispanics (which it demonstrably will NOT do), and similar benefits for the pretty Nigerian girl or the young Iraqi man with whom I work were NEVER provided? They had to become citizens the hard way. And because of that they now have high paying jobs in the nuclear energy field and are tax payers contributing to the common good, something that obviously our Bishops are loathe to do with Hispanics? Now why is that?
Why?
Today the Bishops of North Carolina issued a statement urging the Faithful to support the "Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors" Act, having the acronym "DREAM". This act would authorize the State to provide tuition out of the teat of the public treasury to illegal immigrant minors for their education.
The Bishops use words such as "undocumented immigrant students." That term is merely a euphemism to the actual status of such people: they are illegal immigrants. However laudable it is to educate young people, taking money from the tax-paying legal citizenry and diverting it to illegal immigrants is always and everywhere immoral. It is in a word stealing.
What however is even worse than taking money from the tax payer and redistributing it to those who don't pay taxes is making these people become dependent on largess from the public treasury. That only encourages more illegal immigration, and more slavery of Hispanics to rich white liberal Democrat gringoes who don't themselves want to do the dirty work of harvesting at farms and house keeping in rich neighborhoods. I shall now contact Senators Richard Burr and .Kay Hagan to put an end to illegal immigration in order to stop creating a slave labor environment that imprisons instead of liberating Hispanics. Illegal immigrants of whatever country need to return to their nation of origin.
One last thing: why is this bill so targeted for the ostensible benefit of Hispanics (which it demonstrably will NOT do), and similar benefits for the pretty Nigerian girl or the young Iraqi man with whom I work were NEVER provided? They had to become citizens the hard way. And because of that they now have high paying jobs in the nuclear energy field and are tax payers contributing to the common good, something that obviously our Bishops are loathe to do with Hispanics? Now why is that?
Why?
Resolving Evil in Eternity by Jim McCrea
Folks,
In response to yesterday's post, "The Church Suffering", my friend Jim McCrea from Canada (a Catholic Apologist and Philosopher as well as a degreed Engineer) wrote the following essay entitled, "Resolving Evil in Eternity." Before we begin with that, however, please consider the following words from "He Chose the Nails" by Max Lucado - while Mr. Lucado is a Protestant, what he writes is entirely consistent with what Jim later points out:
In response to yesterday's post, "The Church Suffering", my friend Jim McCrea from Canada (a Catholic Apologist and Philosopher as well as a degreed Engineer) wrote the following essay entitled, "Resolving Evil in Eternity." Before we begin with that, however, please consider the following words from "He Chose the Nails" by Max Lucado - while Mr. Lucado is a Protestant, what he writes is entirely consistent with what Jim later points out:
"It is true that He was weak when He was killed on the cross, but He lives now by God's power." 2nd Corinthians 13:4, New Century VersionResolving Evil in Eternity by Jim McCrea
The Cross. Can you turn any direction without seeing one? Perched atop a chapel. Carved into a graveyard headstone. Engraved in a ring or suspended from a chain. The Cross is the universal symbol of Christianity. An odd choice, don't you think? Strange that a tool of torture would come to embody a movement of hope. The symbols of other faiths are much more upbeat: the six-pointed star of David, the crescent moon of Islam, a lotus blossom for Buddhism. Yet a Cross for Christianity? An instrument of execution?
Why is the Cross the symbol of our faith? To find the answer look no farther than the Cross itself. Its design couldn't be simpler. One beam horizontal - the other vertical. One reaches out - like God's love. The reaches up - as does God's holiness. One represents the width of His love; the other reflects the height of His holiness. The Cross is the intersection. The Cross is where God forgave His children without lowering His standards.
Someone against the doctrine of divine providence states:
"God is not purifying a child who was burned, a soldier who was dismembered, a woman who was raped. God is with them all as God was with Jesus on the cross but we are human and we get sick or get injured."
God is omnipotent. He can do all things. If God is all powerful, He can prevent any or all of these things from happening. Since they do in fact happen, we must conclude that God permits them. As St. Augustine said, "Since God is the highest good, He would not allow any evil to exist in His works, unless His omnipotence and goodness were such as to bring good even out of evil."(Enchiridion xi). Many evils which are possible, God in fact prevents. He strictly sets the bounds of evil in this world (and in an individual person's life) as the shore sets the bounds of the sea. If God did not have absolute control of what evils occur, St. Paul's passage could not be realized. "He will not let you be tested beyond your strength. Along with the test he will give you a way out of it so that you may be able to endure it." (1 Cor. 10:13) and "We know that God makes all things work together for the good of those who love God and are called according to His decree." (Rom. 8:28)
Someone objects:
"God does not torture us [or allow it to be done] for some greater good. If God did, God is no God at all."
That assumes that God is on the same level as us, as simply a creature who flows through time as we do, perceiving good and evil as we do. God, however, is in eternity - that is, He is outside of time, seeing all time at once. His entire life is in an immobile *now,* without past or future. All is present to Him. That gives Him a radically different and higher perspective that we have little notion of now.
It is within this perspective of eternity that evil is resolved. In eternity, evil is transcended and transfigured, so the evil He allows in time, becomes part of the good within eternity.
An analogy may help to explain this. Life on earth is good and evil. It is a mixture of light and shadow. On earth, as we travel through time in this life, we experience good and evil in succession. We experience joy and pain in succession. We experience light and darkness in succession. But in the eternal perspective in heaven, we will experience this all at once. This is how God sees our lives, and how we will see them in heaven. It is like a Rembrandt painting which is beautiful because it has striking contrasts of light and dark. But we must see the whole painting at once to appreciate that. An individual region of darkness is a pure absence. It is a pure negation. And if some being who was traveling across the painting (analogous to our journey through life) happened to be situated over a region of darkness, it would probably experience suffering due to the negative nature of that region. It is only after that creature had "died" and could see the whole painting at once, will those regions of darkness which caused pain previously, be a source of joy.
We can provide some practical examples. An ancient and venerable artifact may be weathered and worn by time. That state of being weathered and worn is an ontological evil because it takes away from the integrity of its being. But given the context of its antiquity and its "enduring" through time, that state of being weathered and worn actually adds to its beauty and charm. That beauty and charm is only there because we, in some way, understand the entire temporal duration of the artifact.
When a person grows older, certain distortions occur on the face because the body due to age, can no longer maintain its proper form. This is an ontological evil because it is the absence of ideal form. However, it contributes to the good on another level because it may denote wisdom that the person has acquired by living a long life. So this ontological evil contributes to the good, actually adding charm and beauty on the spiritual level. This is possible by only taking into account the person's life "all at once," with the necessary phases of youth, middle age, and old age.
Consider the example of St. Therese. The tuberculosis she suffered near the end of her life which ended her life was an evil in itself. But considering her life as a whole, her sainthood would have been less beautiful without it.
Finally, Christ's passion was evil in itself, but God's plan overall has much more goodness and beauty with it included.
Only in eternity will evil be resolved in this way, and what caused the greatest pain on earth, will be the occasion for the greatest joy in heaven. In a sense, we will bring our wounds to heaven, but they will be glorious and not painful.
Tuesday, September 21, 2010
The Church Suffering
Folks,
The story recounted in tonight’s episode about “The Church Suffering” from Real Catholic TV reminds me of what the Blessed Virgin Mary must have felt when Her Divine Son endured torment and torture and death at the hands of the Jewish religious people and the Roman politico-military machine that then ruled Judea.
Just last week (September 15, 2010) was for Catholics the Memorial of Our Lady of Sorrows. It is when we recall the prophecy of Simeon the High Priest given to Mary during the presentation of Jesus as recorded in Luke 2:22-38. Verses 33 through 35 state:
Jesus' father and mother were amazed at what was said about him;
and Simeon blessed them and said to Mary his mother,
"Behold, this child is destined
for the fall and rise of many in Israel,
and to be a sign that will be contradicted
and you yourself a sword will pierce
so that the thoughts of many hearts may be revealed."
We therefore remember at the Wedding Feast of Cana in John 2:1-12 when Mary asked Jesus to turn the water into wine, Jesus replied, “Woman, what is this to you and to me.” By saying that He in effect warned His Mother that if He granted Her request, then that sword about which Simeon had prophesied would surely pierce her heart because it was now a straight shot for Him to the Cross at Calvary. So our Blessed Mother told the servants, “Do whatever He tells you to do.” Mary knew what later She would have to see Her Son endure. She knew that She would have to give Him up.
We remember in John 19:25-27, as Jesus hung on the Cross for crimes He had never committed, His Mother and the disciple whom Jesus loved (likely the Apostle John) stood at the foot of the cross. His Mother had seen it all: the flogging and whipping, the crowning with a wreath of thorns, the road to Golgotha, the pounding of nails into Her Son’s hands and feet, the erection of the Cross and the sagging of the weight of His Body against those nails. That sword in Simeon’s prophecy was now piercing deeply into Her immaculate heart. As Scripture says:
When Jesus saw his mother and the disciple there whom he loved
he said to his mother, "Woman, behold, your son."
Then he said to the disciple,
"Behold, your mother."
And from that hour the disciple took her into his home.
Can our pain – your pain or mine – be any greater than His, or any greater than Hers? Why do these things happen? Why does God allow evil, pain and suffering? The answer is on the Cross. The greatest evil, the greatest pain, the greatest suffering was Deicide – a fancy Latin word meaning “God-killing”. By doubt, by timidity, by stubbornness, by pride, by sin the only begotten Son of God was murdered. And God allowed this evil to happen for the salvation of our souls.
That being the case, we are adopted into the Kingdom (Romans 8:23 and Ephesians 1:5) and right along with Saint Paul in Colossians 1:24-26 was must now declare as the suffering Church:
Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I am filling up what is lacking in the afflictions of Christ on behalf of his body, which is the church, of which I am a minister in accordance with God's stewardship given to me to bring to completion for you the word of God, the mystery hidden from ages and from generations past.
What did St. Paul say in Philippians 1:21-24?
For to me life is Christ, and death is gain. If I go on living in the flesh, that means fruitful labor for me. And I do not know which I shall choose. I am caught between the two. I long to depart this life and be with Christ, (for) that is far better. Yet that I remain (in) the flesh is more necessary for your benefit.
St. Paul actually rejoiced in such suffering and so right along with him in Philippians 3:7-14 we must affirm the following:
(But) whatever gains I had, these I have come to consider a loss because of Christ. More than that, I even consider everything as a loss because of the supreme good of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord. For his sake I have accepted the loss of all things and I consider them so much rubbish, that I may gain Christ and be found in him, not having any righteousness of my own based on the law but that which comes through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God, depending on faith to know him and the power of his resurrection and (the) sharing of his sufferings by being conformed to his death, if somehow I may attain the resurrection from the dead. It is not that I have already taken hold of it or have already attained perfect maturity, but I continue my pursuit in hope that I may possess it, since I have indeed been taken possession of by Christ (Jesus). Brothers, I for my part do not consider myself to have taken possession. Just one thing: forgetting what lies behind but straining forward to what lies ahead, I continue my pursuit toward the goal, the prize of God's upward calling, in Christ Jesus.
The Greek word translated as “rubbish” above is σκυβαλον. It really means “any refuse, as the excrement of animals, offscourings, rubbish, dregs” which is why the King James Version translates it as dung. St. Paul considered all the things he had lost as dung when compared to the unimaginable riches and glory of Christ Jesus our Lord.
Perhaps we should read (or re-read) sometime that famous chapter on Faith – Hebrews 11 – about the prophets and holy men and women of God having been stoned to death, sawn in two, burned alive, hacked apart by the sword. Then we can understand Hebrews 12:1-4:
Therefore, since we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses, let us rid ourselves of every burden and sin that clings to us and persevere in running the race that lies before us while keeping our eyes fixed on Jesus, the leader and perfecter of faith. For the sake of the joy that lay before him he endured the cross, despising its shame, and has taken his seat at the right of the throne of God. Consider how he endured such opposition from sinners, in order that you may not grow weary and lose heart. In your struggle against sin you have not yet resisted to the point of shedding blood.
We must NOT lose heart. That would be such a sad legacy to leave those who came before us. Let us recall what 1st Corinthians 13:12 says:
At present we see indistinctly, as in a mirror, but then face to face. At present I know partially; then I shall know fully, as I am fully known.
As Father Corapi always says, God only allows evil to happen that a greater good may be brought forth. Thus do we recall Saints like Sir Thomas Moore whom King Henry VIII executed – those who held fast to the Faith as Hebrews 11:13-16 describes:
…these died in faith. They did not receive what had been promised but saw it and greeted it from afar and acknowledged themselves to be strangers and aliens on earth, for those who speak thus show that they are seeking a homeland. If they had been thinking of the land from which they had come, they would have had opportunity to return. But now they desire a better homeland, a heavenly one. Therefore, God is not ashamed to be called their God, for he has prepared a city for them.
We must believe that. We must take it on faith, for “the just shall live by faith” (Galatians 3:11)
The story recounted in tonight’s episode about “The Church Suffering” from Real Catholic TV reminds me of what the Blessed Virgin Mary must have felt when Her Divine Son endured torment and torture and death at the hands of the Jewish religious people and the Roman politico-military machine that then ruled Judea.
Just last week (September 15, 2010) was for Catholics the Memorial of Our Lady of Sorrows. It is when we recall the prophecy of Simeon the High Priest given to Mary during the presentation of Jesus as recorded in Luke 2:22-38. Verses 33 through 35 state:
Jesus' father and mother were amazed at what was said about him;
and Simeon blessed them and said to Mary his mother,
"Behold, this child is destined
for the fall and rise of many in Israel,
and to be a sign that will be contradicted
and you yourself a sword will pierce
so that the thoughts of many hearts may be revealed."
We therefore remember at the Wedding Feast of Cana in John 2:1-12 when Mary asked Jesus to turn the water into wine, Jesus replied, “Woman, what is this to you and to me.” By saying that He in effect warned His Mother that if He granted Her request, then that sword about which Simeon had prophesied would surely pierce her heart because it was now a straight shot for Him to the Cross at Calvary. So our Blessed Mother told the servants, “Do whatever He tells you to do.” Mary knew what later She would have to see Her Son endure. She knew that She would have to give Him up.
We remember in John 19:25-27, as Jesus hung on the Cross for crimes He had never committed, His Mother and the disciple whom Jesus loved (likely the Apostle John) stood at the foot of the cross. His Mother had seen it all: the flogging and whipping, the crowning with a wreath of thorns, the road to Golgotha, the pounding of nails into Her Son’s hands and feet, the erection of the Cross and the sagging of the weight of His Body against those nails. That sword in Simeon’s prophecy was now piercing deeply into Her immaculate heart. As Scripture says:
When Jesus saw his mother and the disciple there whom he loved
he said to his mother, "Woman, behold, your son."
Then he said to the disciple,
"Behold, your mother."
And from that hour the disciple took her into his home.
Can our pain – your pain or mine – be any greater than His, or any greater than Hers? Why do these things happen? Why does God allow evil, pain and suffering? The answer is on the Cross. The greatest evil, the greatest pain, the greatest suffering was Deicide – a fancy Latin word meaning “God-killing”. By doubt, by timidity, by stubbornness, by pride, by sin the only begotten Son of God was murdered. And God allowed this evil to happen for the salvation of our souls.
That being the case, we are adopted into the Kingdom (Romans 8:23 and Ephesians 1:5) and right along with Saint Paul in Colossians 1:24-26 was must now declare as the suffering Church:
Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I am filling up what is lacking in the afflictions of Christ on behalf of his body, which is the church, of which I am a minister in accordance with God's stewardship given to me to bring to completion for you the word of God, the mystery hidden from ages and from generations past.
What did St. Paul say in Philippians 1:21-24?
For to me life is Christ, and death is gain. If I go on living in the flesh, that means fruitful labor for me. And I do not know which I shall choose. I am caught between the two. I long to depart this life and be with Christ, (for) that is far better. Yet that I remain (in) the flesh is more necessary for your benefit.
St. Paul actually rejoiced in such suffering and so right along with him in Philippians 3:7-14 we must affirm the following:
(But) whatever gains I had, these I have come to consider a loss because of Christ. More than that, I even consider everything as a loss because of the supreme good of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord. For his sake I have accepted the loss of all things and I consider them so much rubbish, that I may gain Christ and be found in him, not having any righteousness of my own based on the law but that which comes through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God, depending on faith to know him and the power of his resurrection and (the) sharing of his sufferings by being conformed to his death, if somehow I may attain the resurrection from the dead. It is not that I have already taken hold of it or have already attained perfect maturity, but I continue my pursuit in hope that I may possess it, since I have indeed been taken possession of by Christ (Jesus). Brothers, I for my part do not consider myself to have taken possession. Just one thing: forgetting what lies behind but straining forward to what lies ahead, I continue my pursuit toward the goal, the prize of God's upward calling, in Christ Jesus.
The Greek word translated as “rubbish” above is σκυβαλον. It really means “any refuse, as the excrement of animals, offscourings, rubbish, dregs” which is why the King James Version translates it as dung. St. Paul considered all the things he had lost as dung when compared to the unimaginable riches and glory of Christ Jesus our Lord.
Perhaps we should read (or re-read) sometime that famous chapter on Faith – Hebrews 11 – about the prophets and holy men and women of God having been stoned to death, sawn in two, burned alive, hacked apart by the sword. Then we can understand Hebrews 12:1-4:
Therefore, since we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses, let us rid ourselves of every burden and sin that clings to us and persevere in running the race that lies before us while keeping our eyes fixed on Jesus, the leader and perfecter of faith. For the sake of the joy that lay before him he endured the cross, despising its shame, and has taken his seat at the right of the throne of God. Consider how he endured such opposition from sinners, in order that you may not grow weary and lose heart. In your struggle against sin you have not yet resisted to the point of shedding blood.
We must NOT lose heart. That would be such a sad legacy to leave those who came before us. Let us recall what 1st Corinthians 13:12 says:
At present we see indistinctly, as in a mirror, but then face to face. At present I know partially; then I shall know fully, as I am fully known.
As Father Corapi always says, God only allows evil to happen that a greater good may be brought forth. Thus do we recall Saints like Sir Thomas Moore whom King Henry VIII executed – those who held fast to the Faith as Hebrews 11:13-16 describes:
…these died in faith. They did not receive what had been promised but saw it and greeted it from afar and acknowledged themselves to be strangers and aliens on earth, for those who speak thus show that they are seeking a homeland. If they had been thinking of the land from which they had come, they would have had opportunity to return. But now they desire a better homeland, a heavenly one. Therefore, God is not ashamed to be called their God, for he has prepared a city for them.
We must believe that. We must take it on faith, for “the just shall live by faith” (Galatians 3:11)
Quote of the Evening
Folks,
President Obama and the Democrats prove daily the truth of Ecclessiates 10:2:
By the way, in Latin the word for "right hand" is "dexter" (hence the English "dexterous") and the word for "left hand" is "sinister". All one needs to know about the Democratic Party has now been described.
President Obama and the Democrats prove daily the truth of Ecclessiates 10:2:
The wise man's understanding turns him to his right; the fool's understanding turns him to his left.
By the way, in Latin the word for "right hand" is "dexter" (hence the English "dexterous") and the word for "left hand" is "sinister". All one needs to know about the Democratic Party has now been described.
The Pope's Visit to England
Folks,
The activities of and speeches given by the Holy Father during his visit to England may be found at:
Apostolic Journey to the United Kingdom on the occasion of the Beatification of Card. John Henry Newman
(16-19 September 2010)
Commentary by Michael Voris of Real Catholic TV may be found at:
The 'Cheeky' Pope
The activities of and speeches given by the Holy Father during his visit to England may be found at:
Apostolic Journey to the United Kingdom on the occasion of the Beatification of Card. John Henry Newman
(16-19 September 2010)
Commentary by Michael Voris of Real Catholic TV may be found at:
The 'Cheeky' Pope
Sunday, September 19, 2010
An Explanation and a Disclaimer
Folks,
Please let me repeat a Disclaimer I had made on July 14, 2010
First, lest anyone be mistaken or be operating under a misapprehension, the opinions posted at this blogsite are strickly my own. I speak for no Church, denomination, corporation, company, organization or group. I am grateful to God that I am blessed with a great parish and a great employer. However, neither one either approves or disapproves of what is strictly my own personal opinion, nor should anything I write be misconstrued as a reflection on either organization.
Second, I OPPOSE the initiation of force (i.e., violence) against homosexuals, abortionist doctors and nurses, Islamists, illegal Mexican immigrants, and liberal, progressive Democrats in general. Yes, everyone has the right to keep and bear arms, and to defend himself, but no one has the right to harrass, intimidate, or otherwise abuse an individual merely because of his sexual orientation, his position on Roe v Wade, his religion, his country of origin or his political sentiments.
Yes, I oppose homosexual marriage and the consequential immoral activity, but NOT the homosexual.
Yes, I oppose abortion, but I advocate love and understanding toward the women who are misled into believing that murder is a right to choose and who are thereby victimized and traumatized spiritually and physically.
Yes, I oppose Islam, but I advocate the sanctity of the freedom of religion that exists and can exist ONLY in a Christian nation, and never does exist in either an Islamic state or a secular atheist state.
Yes, I oppose illegal immigration, but more than that I oppose the left wing white liberal Democrat gringoes like Nancy Pelosi who live off the slave labor of illegal immigrants, damning them to a life of servitude and poverty - and lest anyone be mistaken, I love the Hispanic people.
One last thing: while I oppose the Presidency of Barack Hussein Obama, he still is our President (though I hate writing those words) and anyone who maligns him due to race is wrong. We have to pray for Obama that the Lord shows him mercy because the alternative is something too fearful for the country to go through. So pray for Obama's conversion. If what happened to King Manasseh in the Old Testament happens to Obama, then America will have been defeated and I don't think any of us, however much we loathe his policies and programs, wants that.
Again: none of my opinions are necessarily held or opposed by the Church at which I attend Mass or the corporation for which I work. So if you the reader disagree with me, then let your disagreement be with me. Don't let whatever failings I have be a reflection on my Church or my employer. That's not fair to them.
Thank you!
Ioannes
Please let me repeat a Disclaimer I had made on July 14, 2010
First, lest anyone be mistaken or be operating under a misapprehension, the opinions posted at this blogsite are strickly my own. I speak for no Church, denomination, corporation, company, organization or group. I am grateful to God that I am blessed with a great parish and a great employer. However, neither one either approves or disapproves of what is strictly my own personal opinion, nor should anything I write be misconstrued as a reflection on either organization.
Second, I OPPOSE the initiation of force (i.e., violence) against homosexuals, abortionist doctors and nurses, Islamists, illegal Mexican immigrants, and liberal, progressive Democrats in general. Yes, everyone has the right to keep and bear arms, and to defend himself, but no one has the right to harrass, intimidate, or otherwise abuse an individual merely because of his sexual orientation, his position on Roe v Wade, his religion, his country of origin or his political sentiments.
Yes, I oppose homosexual marriage and the consequential immoral activity, but NOT the homosexual.
Yes, I oppose abortion, but I advocate love and understanding toward the women who are misled into believing that murder is a right to choose and who are thereby victimized and traumatized spiritually and physically.
Yes, I oppose Islam, but I advocate the sanctity of the freedom of religion that exists and can exist ONLY in a Christian nation, and never does exist in either an Islamic state or a secular atheist state.
Yes, I oppose illegal immigration, but more than that I oppose the left wing white liberal Democrat gringoes like Nancy Pelosi who live off the slave labor of illegal immigrants, damning them to a life of servitude and poverty - and lest anyone be mistaken, I love the Hispanic people.
One last thing: while I oppose the Presidency of Barack Hussein Obama, he still is our President (though I hate writing those words) and anyone who maligns him due to race is wrong. We have to pray for Obama that the Lord shows him mercy because the alternative is something too fearful for the country to go through. So pray for Obama's conversion. If what happened to King Manasseh in the Old Testament happens to Obama, then America will have been defeated and I don't think any of us, however much we loathe his policies and programs, wants that.
Again: none of my opinions are necessarily held or opposed by the Church at which I attend Mass or the corporation for which I work. So if you the reader disagree with me, then let your disagreement be with me. Don't let whatever failings I have be a reflection on my Church or my employer. That's not fair to them.
Thank you!
Ioannes
Political Commentary from Dr. Pournelle at Chaos Manor
Folks,
I encourage one and all to read Dr. Jerry Pournelle's recent political commentary at his Chaos Manor web site:
Ground Game and Nuclear Options
The cost of self government, and other matters
Tea Party Time
I encourage one and all to read Dr. Jerry Pournelle's recent political commentary at his Chaos Manor web site:
Ground Game and Nuclear Options
The cost of self government, and other matters
Tea Party Time
Christine O'Donnell - Authentically Catholic, Morally Conservative and Beautiful - Everything the Liberal Left Isn't
Folks,
Christine O'Donnell running for Joe Biden's old Senate seat is quite remarkable. Please see:
Christine O'Donnell hits the stage at Values Voter Summit
She is an orthodox Roman Catholic, politically and socially conservative, and an outspoken critic of today's sexual immorality. But I think that what burns up the left wingnuts the most about her is that she is single, chaste and BEAUTIFUL.
Christine O'Donnell running for Joe Biden's old Senate seat is quite remarkable. Please see:
Christine O'Donnell hits the stage at Values Voter Summit
She is an orthodox Roman Catholic, politically and socially conservative, and an outspoken critic of today's sexual immorality. But I think that what burns up the left wingnuts the most about her is that she is single, chaste and BEAUTIFUL.
Saturday, September 18, 2010
Photos of St. Maria Goretti
Folks,
Some may recall my post of September 13th entitled, Visit to St. Maria Goretti Catholic Church in Arlington, TX. Because it sponsors daily Eucharistic Adoration, I have been returning there frequently and went again this morning to take some photographs which are provided below. For those who may not know, St. Maria Goretti was a young Italian girl who remained pious and celebate in the face of entreaties to the contrary. Thus, in true liberal Democrat fashion she was murdered by her would-be lover intent on the selfish satisfaction of his passions.
"Lured by the passions of his day and nurturing the dark side of his soul with impious reading and thoughts, Alessandro Serenelli had been a thorn in lovely Maria's side. He propositioned her on several occasions and harassed her with impure suggestions. On July 5, 1902, he would be denied no longer. As she once again rebuffed his sexual advance, shouting, 'No! It is a sin! God does not want it!', Alexander lunged to the deed, stabbing Maria 14 times. Doctors in Nettuno tried to save Maria's life to no avail. After 20 painful hours of suffering during which she forgave and prayed for Alessandro, Maria entered Heaven fortified with the Last Sacraments. Her last earthly gaze rested upon a picture of the Blessed Mother. It was July 6, 1902."
With a name like St. Maria Goretti, this Church is a testament to purity and chastity in the face of all the sexual promiscuity that is legitimatized in today's society, and her murder is exactly what society does to people who don't submit to the pervading sexual perversions of the day.
The Church as it appears from the parking lot on the north.
A most appropriate sign for all parishioners to read before ascending the steps to enter the sanctuary.
Our Blessed Mother in a small garden just to the west of the Offertory for Adoration
St. John the Baptist to the west of the Offertory for Eucharistic Adoration
The Eucharistic Adoration Offertory
St. Francis of Assisi in the Rock Garden to the east of the Offertory and Parish Offices on the south side of the Church
The Piata at the east side of the Rock Garden and to the south of the Church
St. Maria Goretti on the east side of the Church
Some may recall my post of September 13th entitled, Visit to St. Maria Goretti Catholic Church in Arlington, TX. Because it sponsors daily Eucharistic Adoration, I have been returning there frequently and went again this morning to take some photographs which are provided below. For those who may not know, St. Maria Goretti was a young Italian girl who remained pious and celebate in the face of entreaties to the contrary. Thus, in true liberal Democrat fashion she was murdered by her would-be lover intent on the selfish satisfaction of his passions.
"Lured by the passions of his day and nurturing the dark side of his soul with impious reading and thoughts, Alessandro Serenelli had been a thorn in lovely Maria's side. He propositioned her on several occasions and harassed her with impure suggestions. On July 5, 1902, he would be denied no longer. As she once again rebuffed his sexual advance, shouting, 'No! It is a sin! God does not want it!', Alexander lunged to the deed, stabbing Maria 14 times. Doctors in Nettuno tried to save Maria's life to no avail. After 20 painful hours of suffering during which she forgave and prayed for Alessandro, Maria entered Heaven fortified with the Last Sacraments. Her last earthly gaze rested upon a picture of the Blessed Mother. It was July 6, 1902."
With a name like St. Maria Goretti, this Church is a testament to purity and chastity in the face of all the sexual promiscuity that is legitimatized in today's society, and her murder is exactly what society does to people who don't submit to the pervading sexual perversions of the day.
The Church as it appears from the parking lot on the north.
A most appropriate sign for all parishioners to read before ascending the steps to enter the sanctuary.
Our Blessed Mother in a small garden just to the west of the Offertory for Adoration
St. John the Baptist to the west of the Offertory for Eucharistic Adoration
The Eucharistic Adoration Offertory
St. Francis of Assisi in the Rock Garden to the east of the Offertory and Parish Offices on the south side of the Church
The Piata at the east side of the Rock Garden and to the south of the Church
St. Maria Goretti on the east side of the Church
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
