If I saw a venomous snake crawling in the road, any man would say I might seize the nearest stick and kill it; but if I found that snake in bed with my children, that would be another question. I might hurt the children more than the snake, and it might bite them.
In the movie VanHelsing, Dracula has captured Frankenstein's creation, much to the creature's distress:
"What are you complaining about? This is why you were made, to prove that God is not the only one who can create life. And now, you must give that life to my children."
Wow, sounds like the embrionic stem cell debate, in a nutshell, with the bloodsuckers insisting that embryos are created by Man, and thus can be disposed of according to Man's will.
Frankenstien's creation later says "I want to live." Can we let that be the embryo's a priori answer as well?
A few years ago, there was a popular bumper sticker and bracelet. It was the essence of simplicity; four letters, followed by a question mark — WWJD? What Would Jesus Do? Most of the stickers have either faded into oblivion or have been replaced by other causes, such as Support Our Troops or God Bless America.
As the WWJD bumper stickers disappeared, did the message vanish as well? The idea began to haunt me. The more I mulled it over, the darker and more foreboding the tempest swirled, until a single question emerged from this maelstrom of thoughts and emotions: Where is the voice of our spiritual leaders? Where are the sentinels of our souls, raising their voices, asking the tough questions, protesting injustice, condemning corruption?
So, I ask you, clergy, where is your voice?
• WWJD about a war initiated on deception in which, every day, men and women — American, Iraqi, Afghani and others — are dying?
• WWJD about so many of our leaders who loudly proclaim their Christian faith and devotion to God to gain our vote, then, once elected, lie and cheat and deceive?
• WWJD about a government that places more importance on corporate profit than on the environment or the welfare of its citizens?
• WWJD about a government that closes its eyes to so many countries where every day thousands of men, women and children die from diseases that can be easily prevented with affordable, accessible medicines? Or a government that protects the obscene profiteering of its medical and pharmaceutical corporations while hundreds of thousands of its own citizens are unable to afford medical insurance and treatment and die needlessly?
• WWJD with those of us who cry "traitor" and "un-American" at anyone who even so slightly questions our motives in the Middle East, even a mother whose son died there?
Where is the logic in fighting a war on terrorism with every terrifying weapon available to us, just short of nuclear bombs? I'm fairly certain Jesus had a clear position on this.
And we wonder why so many people all over the world hate us. We continually claim that it is because they are envious of our prosperity, when the real reason is our insistence that everyone must submit to our rules. We wave the flag, puff out our chests and proclaim, "God is on our side." And, of course, our God is male, white and conservative Christian.
I ask you, when did the God of compassion, inclusion, tolerance and forgiveness become the God of retribution, condemnation and punishment? Is your silence prompted by a fear that your congregation might be offended and reduce their offerings? Or that the government will reassess your tax status? Or perhaps you have convinced yourself that politics and religion should be kept separate?
So, I ask again, where is your voice? How much more can you tolerate before you speak out? Perhaps the question now should not be, WWJD? Perhaps the more appropriate question should be, WWYD? What will you do?
Maureen’s extraordinary journey takes her from the dusty streets of Jerusalem to the cathedrals of Paris, and ultimately to the scrolls themselves. She must unravel clues that link history’s great artistic masters including Botticelli and Jean Cocteau; the Medici, Bourbon, and Borgia dynasties; and great scientific minds like Leonardo da Vinci and Isaac Newton. Ultimately, she, and the reader, come face to face with Jesus Christ, Mary Magdalene, John the Baptist, Judas, and Salome in the pages of a deeply moving and powerful new gospel, the life of Jesus told by Mary Magdalene.
Is the world ready for a book and an author more controversial than Dan Brown and The Da Vinci Code?
Meet Kathleen McGowan, novelist and self-proclaimed descendant of a union between Jesus and Mary Magdalene. McGowan, who says she is from the "sacred bloodline" Brown made famous in his mega-selling novel, says she's ready to cope with people who think she's crazy or a heretic.
"It's an interesting back story, but we're marketing this fabulous novel," says Trish Todd, editor in chief at Touchstone, a division of Simon & Schuster.
Todd says she has no problem believing McGowan's claim that she descends from a marriage between Jesus and Mary Magdalene. "Yes, I believe her. Her passion and her mission are so strong, how can she not be?"
Goebbels would be proud. Syriana is a masterpiece of expository propaganda, and I have no doubt that it will be used as the proof text of American foreign policy in every mosque around the world. While Michael Moore’s films are over the top, and so obviously subjective, this film will have a longer half-life because it is fiction that will be taken as truth by those who “just know it’s true”. A ‘Book of Goldstein’ (from the book 1984), if you will.
The film is careful to avoid any Jewish stereotypes, lest audiences get distracted from despising the Oil Companies, Emirs, Bankers, Lawyers, Lawmakers, and the CIA. Muslim terrorists are excused, and eventually glorified, as victims of the conspiracy of the aforementioned parties.
An especially ironic moment, a Saudi Imam is feeding some poor hungry workers, and preaching to them. He tells them their problems, and the world’s, are caused by the West, Free Trade, emirs, and those that support them. Ironically, this also happens to be the message of this film.
The imam also does not mention Jews, which proves that this film is a complete fantasy.
Another ironic moment comes at the end of the film. Our CIA hero dashes off to warn a prominent Saudi about plans to assassinate him (at the behest of Oil Companies, of course). In the process of warning him, by stopping his motorcade, he has unwittingly aided the perpetrators by turning a moving target into a stationary one. Duh.
Leave it to a liberal to think that they’re helping when they’re actually making things harder. But it’s the thought that counts, right?
| Level | Score |
|---|---|
| Purgatory (Repenting Believers) | Extreme |
| Level 1 - Limbo (Virtuous Non-Believers) | Moderate |
| Level 2 (Lustful) | Very High |
| Level 3 (Gluttonous) | Low |
| Level 4 (Prodigal and Avaricious) | Very Low |
| Level 5 (Wrathful and Gloomy) | Very Low |
| Level 6 - The City of Dis (Heretics) | Very Low |
| Level 7 (Violent) | Low |
| Level 8- the Malebolge (Fraudulent, Malicious, Panderers) | Moderate |
| Level 9 - Cocytus (Treacherous) | Low |
This whole debate over ESCR (embryonic stem cell research) is hilarious, people ducking under semantics, avoiding certain logical conclusions, and making the wildest claims. According to proponents, ESCR will make lame men walk, blind men see, crazy people sane, and fat people thin. To hear them tell it, ESCR IS JESUS IN A BOTTLE! Who are we pro-life christians to deny the return of Jesus? I'll stay vigilant and skeptical, thank you.
While ESCR pros keep calling embryos by their basic description of "cells" let them answer this: If these cells are so mudane as to not ponder the morality of destroying them, What other kinds of cells, when planted in the human womb, will continue growing into a human being? It's basic biology, gang, stop squirming and answer the question.
The 40,000 embryos in cold storage are like Godiva chocolates in a store window to these folks. The urge is too great. The embryos we've already destroyed didn't yield the results we were seeking, ergo, we need to detroy more of them. And after they've destroyed the 40,000, and have come up with nothing more, what then? Bokanovsky Process manufacturing? Do we let the embryo develop a bit more before destroying it, ".. after all, they're fair game at 2 days. Why not 2 weeks?" will be the reasoning.
And the whiners are making it sound like Dubya's outlawed the practice, rather than declining to fund the research with Federal $$$. If there's so much potential in ESCR, why aren't the major drug companies falling over themselves starting labs and awarding grants? What's more apparent is that the drug companies want the Gov't to fund the research, then the drug companies get to make the meds and treatments without all the up-front research investment in that shaky field. Win-win, right?
The President will get flak from Left and Right on this veto, but he's done what he believes is right. Sometimes, it seems that George is in a party of his own, neither Republican nor Democrat, and I feel that way sometimes as well. Have a good day.
Now the word of the LORD came to me saying,
"Before I formed you in the womb I knew you,
And before you were born I consecrated you;
I have appointed you a prophet to the nations."
In addition to reading about the Desert Fathers, and Bl. Teresa of Calcutta, I'm reading through 'The Imitation of Christ' by Thomas à Kempis. I read this part this morning, and thought that it should be a good reminder to all christian bloggers on the tenor of our discussions. From Book 2, Ch III:
First keep thyself in peace, and then shalt thou be able to be a peacemaker towards others. A peaceable man doth more good than a well-learned. A passionate man turneth even good into evil and easily believeth evil; a good, peaceable man converteth all things into good. He who dwelleth in peace is suspicious of none, but he who is discontented and restless is tossed with many suspicions, and is neither quiet himself nor suffereth others to be quiet. He often saith what he ought not to say, and omitteth what it were more expedient for him to do. He considereth to what duties others are bound, and neglecteth those to which he is bound himself. Therefore be zealous first over thyself, and then mayest thou righteously be zealous concerning thy neighbour.
I guess that instead of incessantly venting our spleens about bishop Invertebrate or sister Heresychaser, OP, we should be first as ruthless in routing our own sins. I get in posting ruts, where it's only the things that rile me enough to write about that get onto the blog. I suspect that others get into that rut as well.
Thou knowest well how to excuse and to colour thine own deeds, but thou wilt not accept the excuses of others. It would be more just to accuse thyself and excuse thy brother. If thou wilt that others bear with thee, bear thou with others. Behold how far thou art as yet from the true charity and humility which knows not how to be angry or indignant against any save self alone. It is no great thing to mingle the good and the meek, for this is naturally pleasing to all, and every one of us willingly enjoyeth peace and liketh best those who think with us: but to be able to live peaceably with the hard and perverse, or with the disorderly, or those who oppose us, this is a great grace and a thing much to be commended and most worthy of a man.
Is there any point to reading heretical journals, if one only does it to stoke resentment and provide fresh accusations? It's one thing to expose a heresey, and offer corrective proof, and another to just lambast the author with aspersions about their faith or intelligence (Mea Culpa).
There are who keep themselves in peace and keep peace also with others, and there are who neither have peace nor suffer others to have peace; they are troublesome to others, but always more troublesome to themselves. And there are who hold themselves in peace, and study to bring others unto peace; nevertheless, all our peace in this sad life lieth in humble suffering rather than in not feeling adversities. He who knoweth best how to suffer shall possess the most peace; that man is conqueror of himself and lord of the world, the friend of Christ, and the inheritor of heaven.
Peace to you all, as there are many trials ahead for us all.
In a related story, a blogger had posted a picture from a Chick tract, about Catholics going to hell:
5 And Jesus seeing their faith said to the paralytic, "Son, your sins are forgiven."
6 But some of the scribes were sitting there and reasoning in their hearts,
7 "Why does this man speak that way? He is blaspheming; who can forgive sins but God alone?"
8 Immediately Jesus, aware in His spirit that they were reasoning that way within themselves, said to them, "Why are you reasoning about these things in your hearts?
9 "Which is easier, to say to the paralytic, 'Your sins are forgiven'; or to say, 'Get up, and pick up your pallet and walk'?
10 "But so that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins"--He said to the paralytic,
11 "I say to you, get up, pick up your pallet and go home."
12 And he got up and immediately picked up the pallet and went out in the sight of everyone, so that they were all amazed and were glorifying God, saying, "We have never seen anything like this."
At the risk of being uncharitable, I'd say that Jack may have misread that section, or is really stretching to justify his bias against the Catholic Church. Here's a section, from John 20, that Jack needs to re-read:
19 So when it was evening on that day, the first day of the week, and when the doors were shut where the disciples were, for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood in their midst and said to them, "Peace be with you."
20 And when He had said this, He showed them both His hands and His side The disciples then rejoiced when they saw the Lord.
21 So Jesus said to them again, "Peace be with you; as the Father has sent Me, I also send you."
22 And when He had said this, He breathed on them and said to them, "Receive the Holy Spirit.
23 "If you forgive the sins of any, their sins have been forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they have been retained."
As successors to the apostles, a Catholic priest has the faculty to hear confessions, and relate God's forgiveness to the sinner! Thanks for playing, see you next week on "What Has Jack Been Smoking"...
[Antony] denounced the Arians, saying that their heresy was the last of all and a forerunner of Antichrist. And he taught the people that the Son of God was not a created being, neither had He come into being from non-existence, but that He was the Eternal Word and Wisdom of the Essence of the Father. And therefore it was impious to say, 'there was a time when He was not,' for the Word was always co-existent with the Father. Wherefore have no fellowship with the most impious Arians. For there is no communion between light and darkness [20]. For you are good Christians, but they, when they say that the Son of the Father, the Word of God, is a created being, differ in nought from the heathen, since they worship that which is created, rather than God the creator. But believe ye that the Creation itself is angry with them because they number the Creator, the Lord of all, by whom all things came into being, with those things which were originated.
"Which of you, having a slave plowing or tending sheep, will say to him when he has come in from the field, 'Come immediately and sit down to eat'?
"But will he not say to him, 'Prepare something for me to eat, and properly clothe yourself and serve me while I eat and drink; and afterward you may eat and drink'?
"He does not thank the slave because he did the things which were commanded, does he?
"So you too, when you do all the things which are commanded you, say, 'We are unworthy slaves; we have done only that which we ought to have done.'"
Mr. Praline, the man attempting to return the parrot, is our verificationist, as is evidenced by his attempt to verify the death of the parrot by reference to experience, such as seeing that it's dead, its falling to the ground when sent aloft, its being nailed to its perch, and so on. The shopkeeper is our philosophically more sophisticated holist. He knows that maintaining the truth of other statements, concerning for example the bird's strength and its affection for the fiords, will allow him to maintain that the parrot is alive. Notice who wins: the shopkeeper is never brought to accept that the parrot is dead. Indeed, the sketch could go on indefinitely without that ever happening.
In fact, without your help, and the help of a million others like you, we won't be able to demand the action necessary to create the Church we need.
Honestly, aren't the goals (both stated and implicit) of takebackourchurch.org pretty much the same goals of the "We Are Church" movement, Voice of the Faithful, the Association for the Rights of Catholics in the Church (ARCC), and those of a myriad of other dissident groups?
I'm all for having a serious discussion of Roman centralism, a problem the Church has been struggling with since at least the Gregorian Reform, if not earlier. But pretending that the Council fathers at Vatican II had the same mindset of the Founding Fathers of the American revolution is just nonsense.
Those in favor of "the divinely instituted hierararchical constitution of the Church" can, of course, like Talmudic scholarsm, quote paragraphs 18 and 19 of LG [Lumen Gentium](and other grafs) to support a position that simply isn't working in the context of our times.
FYI, I think it is poor scholarship to quote verses from Vatican II in order to make any kind of case for anything. We have to look at the legislative history of the Council, some of which is written down, and some of which I was personally privvy to because I was there, conducting Sunday night salons and watching the drama of the Council unfold for four sessions. I can attest that phrases like "the divinely instituted hierararchical constitution of the Church" were inserted AFTER the decisions for a people's Church were already made by huge conciliar majorities.
I'm deeply distrubed by the Catholic heirarchy. Power, authority, and control appear to be their criteria. It is as if the heirachy believe all the laity is good for to follow whatever they dictate. Well, do you know what, it aint so. We the laity do have power. All we need to do is exercise our power. The powers-that-be seem to believe we are helpless. All the power, authority and control of the heirarchy will only operate for them if we permit it to have power, authority and control over us.
To defy this authority we must all have courage, the courage of our convictions.
If there are people who are afraid. that's ok too.
Sometimes Catholic brainwashing is so ingrained in a person's mind they will not, or cannot, defy Catholic authority and tradition. Our Church trained us to believe if the Church said it was so, then it was, no questions asked. A few of us have broken the mold and are using the brain power the good Lord gave us.
"St. Optatus gives a vehement catalogue of the excesses committed by the Donatists on their return... Since they did not admit the validity of the sacraments administered by traditors, when they seized the churches they cast the Holy Eucharist to the dogs; but the dogs, inflamed with madness, attacked their own masters. An ampulla of chrism thrown out of a window was found unbroken on the rocks."
Q. What are the only things that never change in a Jesuit liturgy?
A. The bread and wine.
The Catholic champion, St. Optatus, Bishop of Milevis, published his great work "De schismate Donatistarum" in answer to that of the Donatist Bishop of Carthage, Parmenianus, under Valentinian and Valens, 364-375 (so St. Jerome). Optatus himself tells us that he was writing after the death of Julian (363) and more than sixty years after the beginning of the schism (he means the persecution of 303)... In the first book he describes the origin and growth of the schism; in the second he shows the notes of the true Church; in the third he defends the Catholics from the charge of persecuting, with especial reference to the days of Macarius. In the fourth book he refutes Parmenianus's proofs from Scripture that the sacrifice of a sinner is polluted. In the fifth book he shows the validity of baptism even when conferred by sinners, for it is conferred by Christ, the minister being the instrument only. This is the first important statement of the doctrine that the grace of the sacraments is derived from the opus operatum of Christ independently of the worthiness of the minister.
After St. Augustine had become bishop in 395, he obtained conferences with some of the Donatist leaders, though not with his rival at Hippo. In 400 he wrote three books against the letter of Parmenianus, refuting his calumnies and his arguments from Scripture. More important were his seven books on baptism, in which, after developing the principle already laid down by St. Optatus, that the effect of the sacrament is independent of the holiness of the minister, he shows in great detail that the authority of St. Cyprian is more awkward than convenient for the Donatists.
Nothing more is accomplished by a good priest and nothing less by a wicked priest, because is it accomplished by the word of the creator and not the merit of the priest. Thus the wickedness of the priest does not nullify the effect of the sacrament, just as the sickness of a doctor does not destroy the power of his medicine. Although the "doing of the thing (opus operans)" may be unclear, nevertheless, the "thing which is done (opus operatum)" is always clean
- Pope Innocent III (1160-1216)
