"I feel called to respond to my parish and the local parish school because of my developed Catholicism."
Translation: I demand the Church approve of my homosexual practice and tell my kid that it's just fine.
I support the school on this one. Those of my readers who are challenged in the ability to distinguish gnats from camels will doubtless find it impossible to understand my wild inconsistency here given the Great Scarf Controversy of 2003 which broke out here yesterday.
The difference is that wearing a scarf and trying to observe one's cultural proprieties is an utterly innocous thing that does nobody any harm, while trying to cram approval of homosexual practice on an entire school and parish does lots of people great harm. And, of course, the transparent disinterest in the good of the kid, who is essentially a political pawn for the narcissism of her Baby Boomer Mommies, is breathtaking.
Not too complex really.
Friday, August 29, 2003
Secret Agent Man on Joseph Druce's Legal Strategy
No word yet on whether Druce's attorney is cribbing from the Moral Theologians over on the Freeper board. I suspect so.
No word yet on whether Druce's attorney is cribbing from the Moral Theologians over on the Freeper board. I suspect so.
Something to Refresh My Loathing of the Most Narcissistic Generation in the History of the World
Baby Boomers: my tribe. Sincerest apologies to our parents and our children. We're self-absorbed losers who pissed away what our heroic parents gave us even as we turned to lecture our children on what paragons of the human race we are. God rest Officer Schroeder and give him happy reunion in heaven someday with the family who loves him still.
God mete out some fitting punishment to crack the shell of egoism that surround the wretched Power creature and all who tremble with adoration of her. May she be saved by the merciful Purgatorial judgement of God from the hell her pride has made her to herself and so many others.
Baby Boomers: my tribe. Sincerest apologies to our parents and our children. We're self-absorbed losers who pissed away what our heroic parents gave us even as we turned to lecture our children on what paragons of the human race we are. God rest Officer Schroeder and give him happy reunion in heaven someday with the family who loves him still.
God mete out some fitting punishment to crack the shell of egoism that surround the wretched Power creature and all who tremble with adoration of her. May she be saved by the merciful Purgatorial judgement of God from the hell her pride has made her to herself and so many others.
Leftist Culture War Terrorists Release Weaponized Madonna Spores into the Atmosphere
As Michael Medved sagely observed sometime ago, the "If you don't like it, turn it off" excuse offered by the manufacturers of pop culture is simply inadequate to the problem. I have never owned a Madonna album. I've seenLolita Britney Spears in ads before movies. (She's my poster girl for "Show me a culture that despises virginity and I'll show you a culture that hates children.") I make no effort to follow the edifying career of Christina Aguilera. And yet still, like anthrax, you can't help inhaling information about them whether you like it or not. It's just in the air.
Today's liplock photo on Drudge is an example of the thing I'm talking about. Nobody asked for it. Nobody needs it. Okay. Message received. Casual lesbianism is hip and cool (so much for the "it's all genetics" agitprop). The whole thing couldn't have been more scripted if they'd tried. It was a deliberate act of cultural aggression foisted on us in the public square by exhibitionists eager to "push the envelope" who then say, "Stop looking at us! Why are you meddling with our privacy!"
I need a Madonna/Spears/Aguilera air filter.
As Michael Medved sagely observed sometime ago, the "If you don't like it, turn it off" excuse offered by the manufacturers of pop culture is simply inadequate to the problem. I have never owned a Madonna album. I've seen
Today's liplock photo on Drudge is an example of the thing I'm talking about. Nobody asked for it. Nobody needs it. Okay. Message received. Casual lesbianism is hip and cool (so much for the "it's all genetics" agitprop). The whole thing couldn't have been more scripted if they'd tried. It was a deliberate act of cultural aggression foisted on us in the public square by exhibitionists eager to "push the envelope" who then say, "Stop looking at us! Why are you meddling with our privacy!"
I need a Madonna/Spears/Aguilera air filter.
A Few Jews Have Hysterics over The Passion
Y'know, I'm as empathetic as the next person to the sufferings of the Jews, but some of these quotes are just barmy:
"It will result in anti-Semitism and bigotry. It really takes us back to the Dark Ages ... the Inquisition, the Crusades, all for the so-called sin of the Crucifixion of Jesus."
("so-called sin") I think most reasonable people today would say that the death of Jesus was not exactly humanity's finest hour. And it will launch a new Dark Ages? Inquisition? Crusades? Give thou me a break.
"Nevertheless, Mr. Hikind said he is urging all distributors to make no deals with Mr. Gibson for "The Passion." (After all, distributing the film could lead to totalitarianism and the muzzling of free speech.)
"This film clearly depicts a Jewish mob — not some Jews, but a Jewish mob — the leaders of the Jews, being directly responsible for the Crucifixion of Jesus. Sounds awfully familiar, doesn't it?" Mr. Hikind said.
(Um, well, there *was* a Jewish mob at the trial of Jesus. Of course the film also depicts Mary, the apostles, Joseph of Arimathea and, of course, Jesus himself as Jews. But don't let the facts get in the way of hysteria.)
"The Passion is a lethal weapon against Jews." Little boys wearing yarmulkes chanted the same slogan.
We haven't seen it, but do have this really neat slogan! Get it? "Lethal Weapon"? And look, we're training our kids not to think either!
Malka Moskowitz, an elderly woman from Brooklyn wearing a straw hat, said she was a Holocaust survivor and compared the atmosphere of dispute surrounding the movie with the bloody reign of the Third Reich. "This is the way it started," she said, her voice breaking.
Some poor old woman who knows from *nothing* about this film, her old wounds rubbed raw by professional handwringers who trot her out for a sound bite. I pity her sufferings and venerate her desire to do right. I feel disgust for her manipulators.
A rabbi from Brooklyn called the film pornography. He told Mr. Donohue that he would be responsible if violence broke out.
Of course, he hasn't actually *seen* the film....
Amazing.
Y'know, I'm as empathetic as the next person to the sufferings of the Jews, but some of these quotes are just barmy:
"It will result in anti-Semitism and bigotry. It really takes us back to the Dark Ages ... the Inquisition, the Crusades, all for the so-called sin of the Crucifixion of Jesus."
("so-called sin") I think most reasonable people today would say that the death of Jesus was not exactly humanity's finest hour. And it will launch a new Dark Ages? Inquisition? Crusades? Give thou me a break.
"Nevertheless, Mr. Hikind said he is urging all distributors to make no deals with Mr. Gibson for "The Passion." (After all, distributing the film could lead to totalitarianism and the muzzling of free speech.)
"This film clearly depicts a Jewish mob — not some Jews, but a Jewish mob — the leaders of the Jews, being directly responsible for the Crucifixion of Jesus. Sounds awfully familiar, doesn't it?" Mr. Hikind said.
(Um, well, there *was* a Jewish mob at the trial of Jesus. Of course the film also depicts Mary, the apostles, Joseph of Arimathea and, of course, Jesus himself as Jews. But don't let the facts get in the way of hysteria.)
"The Passion is a lethal weapon against Jews." Little boys wearing yarmulkes chanted the same slogan.
We haven't seen it, but do have this really neat slogan! Get it? "Lethal Weapon"? And look, we're training our kids not to think either!
Malka Moskowitz, an elderly woman from Brooklyn wearing a straw hat, said she was a Holocaust survivor and compared the atmosphere of dispute surrounding the movie with the bloody reign of the Third Reich. "This is the way it started," she said, her voice breaking.
Some poor old woman who knows from *nothing* about this film, her old wounds rubbed raw by professional handwringers who trot her out for a sound bite. I pity her sufferings and venerate her desire to do right. I feel disgust for her manipulators.
A rabbi from Brooklyn called the film pornography. He told Mr. Donohue that he would be responsible if violence broke out.
Of course, he hasn't actually *seen* the film....
Amazing.
My Friend Tells Me I'm Wrong
We won't be in Iraq for 50 years, he says. We'll be there for about 5, with endless stuff like this going on, until enough American troops die and nothing much changes that people finally say, "Okay. We're done. Let's declare victory and bail."
He may be right. But I'm becoming pretty convinced that this won't end well.
We won't be in Iraq for 50 years, he says. We'll be there for about 5, with endless stuff like this going on, until enough American troops die and nothing much changes that people finally say, "Okay. We're done. Let's declare victory and bail."
He may be right. But I'm becoming pretty convinced that this won't end well.
Sorry for the formatting twitchiness
PayPal appears to have broken into Haloscan's liquor cabinet and gone on a bender. When it regains consciousness, the little button gif will return and the formatting will be fine. See how sin disrupts the entire social fabric?
PayPal appears to have broken into Haloscan's liquor cabinet and gone on a bender. When it regains consciousness, the little button gif will return and the formatting will be fine. See how sin disrupts the entire social fabric?
Howard the Dean Could Make a Fine Bishop From Boston
A reader writes:
Fascinating! This would be very interesting for some crack journalist to follow up on. Oh, if only I knew somebody who wrote for the Dallas Morning News or something like that. :)
If it turns out that Dean reported this guy to the cops, then he at least has more moral sense than several members of the American hierarchy.
If it turns out he didn't, then there are two possibilities: 1) he's an irresponsible scum or 2) he's a lying scum and the whole incident is as real as Gore's invention of the Internet. Either way, the Dems will be battening on a man who has all the integrity of the late and unlamented episcopacy of Boston *and* all the veracity of the Clintonistas! And he is, of course, unswervingly committed to the Sacrament of Abortion and the denial of fundamental parental rights, which he is (if the story is false) willing to prop up with outright lies. The Ideal Dem!
A reader writes:
Read your "Art Bell" comments concerning Howard Dean. Following those links you come to this piece:
I have two observations about this comment Howard Dean made about parental notification laws, "As many of you know I'm a doctor... kids to come and talk to me because I knew the whole family, and one time a young lady came into my office who was 12 years old and she thought she might be pregnant. And we did the tests and did the exam and she was pregnant. She didn't know what to do. And after I had talked to her for a while I came to the conclusion that the likely father of her child was her own father. You explain that to the American people who think that parental notification is a good idea. I will veto parental notification. "
Did Dean turn the father in to the proper legal authorities? I hope so, since the girl was a minor and we know how much trouble one in a position of authority can get if a sex crime goes unreported. As a doctor he legally must have that responsibility.
If he did turn this man in, then there--I assume-- must be a legal/public record of it. If so, it should be easy to identify the father/criminal. Can the Dean-team provide us this information? If not, I would then suspect Howard Dean has the same problem as Al Gore as far as making stuff up.
Fascinating! This would be very interesting for some crack journalist to follow up on. Oh, if only I knew somebody who wrote for the Dallas Morning News or something like that. :)
If it turns out that Dean reported this guy to the cops, then he at least has more moral sense than several members of the American hierarchy.
If it turns out he didn't, then there are two possibilities: 1) he's an irresponsible scum or 2) he's a lying scum and the whole incident is as real as Gore's invention of the Internet. Either way, the Dems will be battening on a man who has all the integrity of the late and unlamented episcopacy of Boston *and* all the veracity of the Clintonistas! And he is, of course, unswervingly committed to the Sacrament of Abortion and the denial of fundamental parental rights, which he is (if the story is false) willing to prop up with outright lies. The Ideal Dem!
What made me ask the questions about ghosts?
Just curious. There are various "fringe" areas where the Tradition has never had very much to say since the data is so fuzzy. This is one and I was just curious about it.
I know people who've had dreams about dead people (and I've had some significant dreams about my late father--though I couldn't prove they were supernatural), but I've never seen a specter while awake. I do know people who have experienced poltergeist phenomena and I have friends who can tell some stories that will raise the hair on the back of your neck (see, for instance, Rod Dreher's comments below). And my wife had a relative who came down with something mild, had a dream, and awoke to tell his wife that "the baby" (their deceased daughter) had come to him in the dream and told him she'd be back for him on Tuesday. He then died very unexpectedly on Tuesday. I suspect there are some people who may well have a sort of charism in this department. People who just have... experiences... with the dead that they didn't ask for but needed for some mysterious reason in the Great Plan.
Just curious. There are various "fringe" areas where the Tradition has never had very much to say since the data is so fuzzy. This is one and I was just curious about it.
I know people who've had dreams about dead people (and I've had some significant dreams about my late father--though I couldn't prove they were supernatural), but I've never seen a specter while awake. I do know people who have experienced poltergeist phenomena and I have friends who can tell some stories that will raise the hair on the back of your neck (see, for instance, Rod Dreher's comments below). And my wife had a relative who came down with something mild, had a dream, and awoke to tell his wife that "the baby" (their deceased daughter) had come to him in the dream and told him she'd be back for him on Tuesday. He then died very unexpectedly on Tuesday. I suspect there are some people who may well have a sort of charism in this department. People who just have... experiences... with the dead that they didn't ask for but needed for some mysterious reason in the Great Plan.
"The white picket fence of the 1950s"
It's amazing how social revolutionaries steeped in the Deep Thought of the 60s think that all of human history began in the 1950s. Someone needs to alert them to the fact that the concept of the family as one man and one woman with children is... gosh... decades older than that.
It's amazing how social revolutionaries steeped in the Deep Thought of the 60s think that all of human history began in the 1950s. Someone needs to alert them to the fact that the concept of the family as one man and one woman with children is... gosh... decades older than that.
A reader writes:
Unfortunately the only nature I've been... well, not enjoying exactly, is a long night of Gastrointestinal Ick, which is why I'm up so early.
I am not an historian and can't competently deal with the fine points of the case. However, speaking as an ordinary layman, I do remark that from what I've seen on Amy's board and read elsewhere, I would concur with Rabbi David Dalin that Pius was indeed a righteous gentile. Did he do everything perfectly? Probably not (that's a question for historians). Did he do a great deal? Yes. I think it obvious he did and that the "Hitler's Pope" slander is despicable.
It is one of the weird twists of history that so many in both the Catholic and Jewish communities should survey the wreckage of WWII, a wreckage in Allied Leaders like Roosevelt and Churchill refused to bomb the rail lines to Auschwitz and in which Stalin did nothing as the Warsaw Ghetto was annihilated, and look past this to a man who had not a single gun to defend himself, and yet who was responsible for the rescue of more Jews than any other man in Europe--and condemn him as practically being the architect of the Holocaust.
I think future generations may well look back on us as the moral freaks for being so blind to such an obvious fact.
There is a link to a recent story on Pius XII on Amy's blog that I have been commenting on. There is the usual give and take. I am disputing the usual "the pope was silent", "the pope didn't care at all about the Jews", "the pope was all about power" line of reasoning. Since I read your blog every day, I was interested in your take on it all. I have posted under the name Michael.
One of my big gripes is "the pope was silent", when just a little research proves that that is a false statement, but unfortunately it seems to be the accepted wisdom from the public at large (at least from casual comments I hear from acquaintances, friends who get most of their news from the media).
I know you're busy; you're probably heading off to enjoy nature, if I know you.
Unfortunately the only nature I've been... well, not enjoying exactly, is a long night of Gastrointestinal Ick, which is why I'm up so early.
I am not an historian and can't competently deal with the fine points of the case. However, speaking as an ordinary layman, I do remark that from what I've seen on Amy's board and read elsewhere, I would concur with Rabbi David Dalin that Pius was indeed a righteous gentile. Did he do everything perfectly? Probably not (that's a question for historians). Did he do a great deal? Yes. I think it obvious he did and that the "Hitler's Pope" slander is despicable.
It is one of the weird twists of history that so many in both the Catholic and Jewish communities should survey the wreckage of WWII, a wreckage in Allied Leaders like Roosevelt and Churchill refused to bomb the rail lines to Auschwitz and in which Stalin did nothing as the Warsaw Ghetto was annihilated, and look past this to a man who had not a single gun to defend himself, and yet who was responsible for the rescue of more Jews than any other man in Europe--and condemn him as practically being the architect of the Holocaust.
I think future generations may well look back on us as the moral freaks for being so blind to such an obvious fact.
Thursday, August 28, 2003
Interesting Resistance Movement Afoot
When the secular insurgents of yesterday become the flabby apparatchiks of today and the drooling old farts of tomorrow, it will be fun to see the grass roots re-assert old pieties as an act of youthful rebellion.
When the secular insurgents of yesterday become the flabby apparatchiks of today and the drooling old farts of tomorrow, it will be fun to see the grass roots re-assert old pieties as an act of youthful rebellion.
Watched King Kong tonight with the little ones
What I love most about the film is the sense of boyish *wonder* in it. "It's adventure, fame and money! It's the thrill of a lifetime and a long sea voyage!" says Carl Denham to Anne Darrow and something in the heart leaps up. Yes! I'd be there in a heartbeat! Who wouldn't? And even the portrayal of the natives on Skull Island doesn't come off as racist. It comes off as boyish. It's a tale told by boys for boys. One doesn't think, "Ah! Primitives!" Still less does one want to hear Marxist claptrap about colonialism. Instead, you watch and think, just like Denham, "Holy mackeral! What a show!" It's all *wonderful*! Islands which you alone know about because of a secret map from a sailor in Singapore. Lurking danger behind an immense wall that might be Egyptian. Dinosaurs. Narrow escapes. And Kong himself. Terrifying and *wonderful*.
My children take me back to a time I should never lose if I want to stay human.
What I love most about the film is the sense of boyish *wonder* in it. "It's adventure, fame and money! It's the thrill of a lifetime and a long sea voyage!" says Carl Denham to Anne Darrow and something in the heart leaps up. Yes! I'd be there in a heartbeat! Who wouldn't? And even the portrayal of the natives on Skull Island doesn't come off as racist. It comes off as boyish. It's a tale told by boys for boys. One doesn't think, "Ah! Primitives!" Still less does one want to hear Marxist claptrap about colonialism. Instead, you watch and think, just like Denham, "Holy mackeral! What a show!" It's all *wonderful*! Islands which you alone know about because of a secret map from a sailor in Singapore. Lurking danger behind an immense wall that might be Egyptian. Dinosaurs. Narrow escapes. And Kong himself. Terrifying and *wonderful*.
My children take me back to a time I should never lose if I want to stay human.
Crisis has such great readers
This is from the latest issue:
This is from the latest issue:
SPARE THE MEAT, SPOIL THE GOSPEL
I was delighted to read the Manichaean ramblings of Danel Paden, director of the Catholic Vegetarian Society ("Letters," June 2003). It confirmed my theory that fanaticism in Western society alternates between nudism and vegetarianism, both of which contradict the order of grace.
As an optimist, I happily trust that Paden confines his extreme commitments to vegetarianism.
Taste is one thing; it is another thing to condemn meat eating as "evil" and permissible only "in rare and unfortunate circumstances." Paden disagrees with no less an authority than God, Who forbids us to call any edible unworthy (Mark 7: 18-19), and Who enjoins St Peter to eat pork chops and lobster in one of my favorite revelations (Acts 10: 9-16). Does the Catholic Vegetarian Society think that our Lord was wrong to have served up fish to the 5,000, or should He have refrained from eating the Passover Lamb? When He rose from the dead and appeared in the Upper Room, He did not ask for a bowl of Cheerios, nor did He whip up a meatless omelette on the shore of Galilee.
Man was made to eat flesh (Genesis 1: 26-31; 9: 1-6), with the exception of human flesh. I stand on record against cannibalism, whether it be inflicted upon the Mbuti Pygmies by the Congolese Army or on larger people by a maniac in Milwaukee. But I am also grateful that the benevolent father in the parable did not welcome his prodigal son home with a bowl of radishes.
Vegetarians assume an unedifying posture of detachment from the sufferings of vegetables that are mashed, stewed, diced, and shredded. In expensive restaurants, cherries are publicly burned in brandy to the applause of diners. It is not uncommon for people to submerge olives in iced gin and twist the peels of lemons. Be indignant, vegetarian, but not so selectively indignant that the bleat of the lamb and the plaintive moo of the cow drown out the whine of our brother the bean and the quiet sigh of the cauliflower.
Vegetables have reactive impulses. Were we to confine our diet to creatures that lacked sense and do not even respond to light, we could only eat liturgists and liberal Democrats.
The Rev. George W. Rutler
New York City
Dennis Kucinich Running for Captain of Spaceship America
Interview shows definitively that Kucinich's mind is an incomprehensible goulashe of eco-spirituality, deracinated post-Catholic drivel, room temperature universalism, and spiritualized policy wonkism. The only glue that holds it all together is commitment to the Sacrament of Abortion.
Interview shows definitively that Kucinich's mind is an incomprehensible goulashe of eco-spirituality, deracinated post-Catholic drivel, room temperature universalism, and spiritualized policy wonkism. The only glue that holds it all together is commitment to the Sacrament of Abortion.
Back in 1999...
the black helicopter crowd was filling Art Bell's airwaves with nutty conspiracy theories about how Clinton was going to declare Martial Law when the Y2K bug struck and erect a Nazi dictatorship with him as President for Life. You had to be waaaaaaay out on the nutso fringe of the Right to go for this stuff. No serious conservative touched such kookmongering with a barge pole.
The great thing about the Democratic party is that the kookiest Art Bell listener can now be a Presidential frontrunner!
the black helicopter crowd was filling Art Bell's airwaves with nutty conspiracy theories about how Clinton was going to declare Martial Law when the Y2K bug struck and erect a Nazi dictatorship with him as President for Life. You had to be waaaaaaay out on the nutso fringe of the Right to go for this stuff. No serious conservative touched such kookmongering with a barge pole.
The great thing about the Democratic party is that the kookiest Art Bell listener can now be a Presidential frontrunner!
The FLA Supreme Court Just Really Likes Putting People to Death
I'm one of those hopeless weenies who thinks, as the Pope does, that even guilty human life should be preserved unless it is an ongoing danger to the community.
"It's a pity Bilbo didn't kill him when he had the chance."
"Pity? It was pity that stayed Bilbo's hand! Many that live deserve death, and some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them?"
I'm one of those hopeless weenies who thinks, as the Pope does, that even guilty human life should be preserved unless it is an ongoing danger to the community.
"It's a pity Bilbo didn't kill him when he had the chance."
"Pity? It was pity that stayed Bilbo's hand! Many that live deserve death, and some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them?"
Ghosts
What are they? What do you make of them? This, like most "paranormal" stuff is one of those topics about which Catholic theology has very little to say other than "Don't try to contact dead people" and "It's a stranger world than we know." The basic rule of thumb for Catholics is, "Don't seek out the paranormal. On the other hand, sometimes weird things happen to people without their seeking it out and it should be discerned, not chucked out instantaneously." If the paranormal thing doesn't conflict with the Tradition (think "Lourdes") then it might be from God. If it does, ignore it, even if there seems to be something genuinely supernatural taking place. The devil is supernatural, after all. That doesn't mean he's doing God's work.
Any thought on the matter?
What are they? What do you make of them? This, like most "paranormal" stuff is one of those topics about which Catholic theology has very little to say other than "Don't try to contact dead people" and "It's a stranger world than we know." The basic rule of thumb for Catholics is, "Don't seek out the paranormal. On the other hand, sometimes weird things happen to people without their seeking it out and it should be discerned, not chucked out instantaneously." If the paranormal thing doesn't conflict with the Tradition (think "Lourdes") then it might be from God. If it does, ignore it, even if there seems to be something genuinely supernatural taking place. The devil is supernatural, after all. That doesn't mean he's doing God's work.
Any thought on the matter?
Speaking of that Strong Tower of Episcopal Courage in Los Angeles
I'm sure we will be seeing oodles of spirited leadership from the Cardinal of Hollywood as the Gov mulls a bill to force foster parents to knuckle under to gay brownshirtism at its finest.
I'm sure we will be seeing oodles of spirited leadership from the Cardinal of Hollywood as the Gov mulls a bill to force foster parents to knuckle under to gay brownshirtism at its finest.
With Thomas "Windshield" O'Brien, Thomas Daily, Rembert Weakland, and Cdl. Law out of the running...
the competition is getting more intense for the "Worst Still-Serving Bishop" Award. Bp. Adamec may be pulling into the lead. But there is still the inimitable John McCormack of New Hampshire, who just didn't notice anything odd about Paul Shanley after years of warnings, flares, klaxons, foghorns, explosions and ear-splitting screams trying to get his attention to the fact that public advocacy of manboy love might signal just the teensiest problem. And, there are other competitors too, notably our Man in LA. Decisions, decisions.
the competition is getting more intense for the "Worst Still-Serving Bishop" Award. Bp. Adamec may be pulling into the lead. But there is still the inimitable John McCormack of New Hampshire, who just didn't notice anything odd about Paul Shanley after years of warnings, flares, klaxons, foghorns, explosions and ear-splitting screams trying to get his attention to the fact that public advocacy of manboy love might signal just the teensiest problem. And, there are other competitors too, notably our Man in LA. Decisions, decisions.
JRR TOLKIEN - LORD OF THE RINGS CONFERENCE
Think I'll go. I had dinner with Joe when I was in Michigan a while back. Lovely man.
with JOSEPH PEARCE
SEATTLE UNIVERSITY - PIGOTT AUDITORIUM
Saturday, October 4, 2003 - All day
9:00 AM Registration
Students: $15.00
Adults: $20.00
info: (425) 743-8821
Think I'll go. I had dinner with Joe when I was in Michigan a while back. Lovely man.
Genetically Modified Food Fight
Rome recently said, "Sounds fine to us." Green Kiwis are upset by this. Some people think the Church has no business involving itself in such matters. I think the Church *must* involve itself in such questions. Certainly the questions of "How do we feed starving people?" vs. "What are our responsibilities for stewardship of creation?" are central to the Church's moral theology and the mission of the gospel and they are not simple ones. Rome basically appears to have come down on the side of, "Don't be too fussy about gene-modification if it means human beings will be fed." A reasonable stand. However, there remain big questions in the "What could it hurt?/How was I supposed to know?" department that await more light from the sciences. However the knee jerk opposition to GM is foolish, particularly in a starving world.
Rome recently said, "Sounds fine to us." Green Kiwis are upset by this. Some people think the Church has no business involving itself in such matters. I think the Church *must* involve itself in such questions. Certainly the questions of "How do we feed starving people?" vs. "What are our responsibilities for stewardship of creation?" are central to the Church's moral theology and the mission of the gospel and they are not simple ones. Rome basically appears to have come down on the side of, "Don't be too fussy about gene-modification if it means human beings will be fed." A reasonable stand. However, there remain big questions in the "What could it hurt?/How was I supposed to know?" department that await more light from the sciences. However the knee jerk opposition to GM is foolish, particularly in a starving world.
The Spectator is Off Its Meds
However, this quote, if real, shows how ripe some people are for the rule of Antichrist:
The rest of the piece is Milk-Out-of-the-Nose funny.
However, this quote, if real, shows how ripe some people are for the rule of Antichrist:
The former Belgian prime minister Paul-Henri Spaak once made a plea for ‘a man of sufficient stature to hold the allegiance of all people’ and added, ‘Be he God or the Devil we will receive him.’
The rest of the piece is Milk-Out-of-the-Nose funny.
A murderous Bronze Age Fanatic?
Heck yeah. But possessed of a visceral drop dead authenticity that's capable of seeing the *good* in the people he butchers.
Heck yeah. But possessed of a visceral drop dead authenticity that's capable of seeing the *good* in the people he butchers.
Welcome NRO Folk!
I'm honored to see Mark-Shea.com is NRO's "Cool Site of the Day". Boy, if those chicks in high school who wouldn't go out with me could see me now.
Browse away. Be enriched and renewed by my ASCII. Buy all my stuff. I love you long time, GI Joe.
I'm honored to see Mark-Shea.com is NRO's "Cool Site of the Day". Boy, if those chicks in high school who wouldn't go out with me could see me now.
Browse away. Be enriched and renewed by my ASCII. Buy all my stuff. I love you long time, GI Joe.
A Colorful Evangelical's Pithy Sayings Preserved by His Students
Click on the quotes link. I love profs like this.
Click on the quotes link. I love profs like this.
I side with the girl.
Sometimes Jewish kids go to Catholic schools. (Hey! They're good schools! If you want your kid to get a good education and there aren't other options, you take what you can get.) If some Jewish kid wore a yarmulkah to a Catholic school I daresay the school wouldn't forbid it. The Catholic Church is supposed to honor the cultural customs of the human race when they do no harm. This is a needless offense.
Sometimes Jewish kids go to Catholic schools. (Hey! They're good schools! If you want your kid to get a good education and there aren't other options, you take what you can get.) If some Jewish kid wore a yarmulkah to a Catholic school I daresay the school wouldn't forbid it. The Catholic Church is supposed to honor the cultural customs of the human race when they do no harm. This is a needless offense.
A reader asks:
I am really quite surprised to hear so many Catholic deny the principle that the Catholic sacrament of confession presupposes: that sins hurt the whole body of Christ, not just the individual sinned against, the sinner and God. It is precisely because we are members of one another (Rom 12:5) that what injures one injures all. So the priest hears confessions and restores the penitent, not only to fellowship with God, but to fellowship with the injured Body, by the grace of God.
So the notion that "Geoghan hurt only his victims, not me, so I don't have to forgive him" is utterly un-Catholic. It is also, by the way, manifestly untrue from a purely observational standpoint too. If a person hates Geoghan enough to rejoice over his death with the words "I would rather he 'lived' an entire horrid lifetime, in prison hell. Ummmm... Nah... he got what he deserved. Good riddance, subhuman" then the person, by any reasonable measure, has something against Geoghan. Geoghan has done him an injury. And therefore that person *is* a victim of Geoghan's and, by our Lord's command, is bound to extend forgiveness.
As to how it's done: the way we always do it. By desiring with our wills the best for Geoghan. By hoping that he made his peace with God and was forgiven. By praying, "Lord have mercy on him." By putting to death the urge to rejoice over his death. By not calling our thirsty hatred and lust for vengeance a "Christian desire for justice." If Christ does not need our help in forgiving, he certainly doesn't need it in damning.
Can you point to some way an ordinary catholic can or should forgive someone's sins against a third party?
I am really quite surprised to hear so many Catholic deny the principle that the Catholic sacrament of confession presupposes: that sins hurt the whole body of Christ, not just the individual sinned against, the sinner and God. It is precisely because we are members of one another (Rom 12:5) that what injures one injures all. So the priest hears confessions and restores the penitent, not only to fellowship with God, but to fellowship with the injured Body, by the grace of God.
So the notion that "Geoghan hurt only his victims, not me, so I don't have to forgive him" is utterly un-Catholic. It is also, by the way, manifestly untrue from a purely observational standpoint too. If a person hates Geoghan enough to rejoice over his death with the words "I would rather he 'lived' an entire horrid lifetime, in prison hell. Ummmm... Nah... he got what he deserved. Good riddance, subhuman" then the person, by any reasonable measure, has something against Geoghan. Geoghan has done him an injury. And therefore that person *is* a victim of Geoghan's and, by our Lord's command, is bound to extend forgiveness.
As to how it's done: the way we always do it. By desiring with our wills the best for Geoghan. By hoping that he made his peace with God and was forgiven. By praying, "Lord have mercy on him." By putting to death the urge to rejoice over his death. By not calling our thirsty hatred and lust for vengeance a "Christian desire for justice." If Christ does not need our help in forgiving, he certainly doesn't need it in damning.
The pleasure of being a Christian Vigilante
You get to know the very mind of God and the state of a man's soul, to lick one's lips in trembling delight over the suffering of those we hate, and to rejoice over the (assumed) damnation of a human being:
You get to exempt yourself from the absolute duty to forgive:
And, when pesky people remind you that it *is* an absolute duty per Our Lord's own words ("For if you forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father also will forgive you; but if you do not forgive men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses." - Matthew 6:14-15)., you get to play the delightful game of "Christian Morality Allows Me to Identify with Others Enough to Hate Their Victimizers, But Not Enough to Forgive Their Victimizers:
What a wonderful deal Christian Vigilantes have. They can pour out hatred on most of the human race if they like (since most of the human race will not sin against them directly) and still congratulate themselves on what good people they are and how pleased God is with them (not like that subhuman scum over there, may he burn in Hell forever). Never mind the fact that there is no Revised Vigilante Version that adds "if they repent" to the command to forgive and not hate sinners.
It is true that forgiveness will not benefit the one to whom forgiveness is extended if it is not received. But it is a complete falsehood that we are free to go on hating somebody, rejoicing over their death and hoping for their damnation, if they don't repent. And, of course, it's also not written anywhere that we know Geoghan did not repent and receive the Mercy.
It's scary the judgment some Christians pile up for themselves in their Pharisaic lust to say, "I thank thee, O Lord, that I am not like other men." May they find the Mercy they so brutally deny to others. And may it teach them to show mercy before it's too late for them.
You get to know the very mind of God and the state of a man's soul, to lick one's lips in trembling delight over the suffering of those we hate, and to rejoice over the (assumed) damnation of a human being:
"He's dead, and in hell. The 150 boys he molested will carry the emotional scars for their entire lives.
I would rather he 'lived' an entire horrid lifetime, in prison hell. Ummmm...
Nah... he got what he deserved.
Good riddance, subhuman."
You get to exempt yourself from the absolute duty to forgive:
"Geoghan got exactly what he deserved. Christ does not need us to forgive this scumbag, that's solely His privelege."
And, when pesky people remind you that it *is* an absolute duty per Our Lord's own words ("For if you forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father also will forgive you; but if you do not forgive men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses." - Matthew 6:14-15)., you get to play the delightful game of "Christian Morality Allows Me to Identify with Others Enough to Hate Their Victimizers, But Not Enough to Forgive Their Victimizers:
Moreover, we can only forgive 'those who trespass against us.' We can't forgive anybody for any offense they commit against someone else.
What a wonderful deal Christian Vigilantes have. They can pour out hatred on most of the human race if they like (since most of the human race will not sin against them directly) and still congratulate themselves on what good people they are and how pleased God is with them (not like that subhuman scum over there, may he burn in Hell forever). Never mind the fact that there is no Revised Vigilante Version that adds "if they repent" to the command to forgive and not hate sinners.
It is true that forgiveness will not benefit the one to whom forgiveness is extended if it is not received. But it is a complete falsehood that we are free to go on hating somebody, rejoicing over their death and hoping for their damnation, if they don't repent. And, of course, it's also not written anywhere that we know Geoghan did not repent and receive the Mercy.
It's scary the judgment some Christians pile up for themselves in their Pharisaic lust to say, "I thank thee, O Lord, that I am not like other men." May they find the Mercy they so brutally deny to others. And may it teach them to show mercy before it's too late for them.
Okey doke. Got the Blogmatrix RSS code and other stuff
Check the left margin, O You Who Are Interested.
Check the left margin, O You Who Are Interested.
Whatever
The bishops have the liturgical fidgets. We've already implemented some of this stuff here in Seattle. Most especially stupid was the directive to stand after communion "for the sake of unity." Of course, people don't really want to stand, but they will if they *have* to. Sensing the resentment at the "Peter, try experiments on my rats" approach to liturgy, the archdiocese also said, "Well, just stand till the end of the first communion hymn. Then, if you like, you can sit or kneel." Result: at the end of the first communion hymn, a parish that was formerly united in kneeling after communion is now half kneeling and half standing. Brilliant.
Unlike so many, I do not detect the Trump of Doom in these imbecilities and I am frankly amazed at how much energy Catholics can spend fussing over this stuff. My main desire is that the liturgy simply *stay put* so I can get my mind off the thought "*Now* what is it?" and back on to God. My parish, thanks be to God, celebrates the liturgy very well and puts the focus on God, not on Fr. Look at Me. Indeed, we are refreshingly free of egocentric priests.
Liturgy should be like an old pair of shoes. The mark of good shoes is that you don't notice you are wearing them.
The bishops have the liturgical fidgets. We've already implemented some of this stuff here in Seattle. Most especially stupid was the directive to stand after communion "for the sake of unity." Of course, people don't really want to stand, but they will if they *have* to. Sensing the resentment at the "Peter, try experiments on my rats" approach to liturgy, the archdiocese also said, "Well, just stand till the end of the first communion hymn. Then, if you like, you can sit or kneel." Result: at the end of the first communion hymn, a parish that was formerly united in kneeling after communion is now half kneeling and half standing. Brilliant.
Unlike so many, I do not detect the Trump of Doom in these imbecilities and I am frankly amazed at how much energy Catholics can spend fussing over this stuff. My main desire is that the liturgy simply *stay put* so I can get my mind off the thought "*Now* what is it?" and back on to God. My parish, thanks be to God, celebrates the liturgy very well and puts the focus on God, not on Fr. Look at Me. Indeed, we are refreshingly free of egocentric priests.
Liturgy should be like an old pair of shoes. The mark of good shoes is that you don't notice you are wearing them.
Wednesday, August 27, 2003
I can be even more pedantic
A Jewish commenter makes the common mistake of confusing Marcionism with Catholic teaching. Not surprising since so many Catholics do too. Supersessionism and the idea that the Old Testament is somehow revoked by the New is a big no-no in Catholic teaching. "They are Israelites, and to them belong [note present tense] the sonship, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship, and the promises; to them belong the patriarchs, and of their race according to the flesh, is the Christ" (Rom. 9:4-5). The New Covenant (a term the apostles get from the lips of Jesus himself, who in turn consciously borrows from Jeremiah 31:31-34) does not abolish but fulfills the Old. Yes, there are aspects of Old Testament ritual and ceremony which are, from the Catholic perspective, no longer necessary since the Reality who is Christ has come (a moot point for most Christians anyway since they are Gentiles). The epistle to the Hebrews (and Romans and Galatians) are about this. But it is Marcion, not Christianity, who took the term "Old Testament" to mean "obsolete testament". The Christian picture is found instead in the image of the wild olive branch grafted onto the cultivated tree. Paul's warning to supercessionists is grave: You do not support the root, the root supports you. (Romans 11)
A Jewish commenter makes the common mistake of confusing Marcionism with Catholic teaching. Not surprising since so many Catholics do too. Supersessionism and the idea that the Old Testament is somehow revoked by the New is a big no-no in Catholic teaching. "They are Israelites, and to them belong [note present tense] the sonship, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship, and the promises; to them belong the patriarchs, and of their race according to the flesh, is the Christ" (Rom. 9:4-5). The New Covenant (a term the apostles get from the lips of Jesus himself, who in turn consciously borrows from Jeremiah 31:31-34) does not abolish but fulfills the Old. Yes, there are aspects of Old Testament ritual and ceremony which are, from the Catholic perspective, no longer necessary since the Reality who is Christ has come (a moot point for most Christians anyway since they are Gentiles). The epistle to the Hebrews (and Romans and Galatians) are about this. But it is Marcion, not Christianity, who took the term "Old Testament" to mean "obsolete testament". The Christian picture is found instead in the image of the wild olive branch grafted onto the cultivated tree. Paul's warning to supercessionists is grave: You do not support the root, the root supports you. (Romans 11)
Catholic Outlook is a cool site
And if the look resembles Mark-Shea.com, that wouldn't be because Gary Hoge graciously helped techno-illiterate me put my site together or anything. No sir. It's just... coincidence! Yeah! That's it! That's the ticket! Coincidence!
And if the look resembles Mark-Shea.com, that wouldn't be because Gary Hoge graciously helped techno-illiterate me put my site together or anything. No sir. It's just... coincidence! Yeah! That's it! That's the ticket! Coincidence!
Christopher Hitchens Inadvertently Proves that Sin Makes You Stupid
Watching a brilliant mind like his reduced to high school sophomore filosufee like "If God made us in his image, then how do you explain bad people? Huh? Huh? How do you explain that? Hah!" is painful to watch. Gee. Never noticed that people sin before. What a master stroke. Christianity and Judaism lie prostrate before your genius.
Stick to politics, Chris.
Watching a brilliant mind like his reduced to high school sophomore filosufee like "If God made us in his image, then how do you explain bad people? Huh? Huh? How do you explain that? Hah!" is painful to watch. Gee. Never noticed that people sin before. What a master stroke. Christianity and Judaism lie prostrate before your genius.
Stick to politics, Chris.
FLA bishops' statement on Terri Schiavo
Jeb Bush Gets off the Dime too
Finally, some movement from the most visible Catholics in Florida. Memo to the bishops and the Gov: "The Church thinks in centuries" is a nice sentiment when you have centuries in which to act. Prudence is the virtue of seeing what needs to be done and doing it when it needs done. Better late than never though.
Jeb Bush Gets off the Dime too
Finally, some movement from the most visible Catholics in Florida. Memo to the bishops and the Gov: "The Church thinks in centuries" is a nice sentiment when you have centuries in which to act. Prudence is the virtue of seeing what needs to be done and doing it when it needs done. Better late than never though.
What it's like to be Catholic some days
Just replace "Protestant" with "Catholic" and you've read a lot of my mail over the years.
I am just worried sick about those poor Protestant idol worshippers. Why, just today I read where a Protestant let slip the Awful Truth about what they really believe: they worship statues. Oh yes, it's true. It was on the news and everything. A Protestant actually called a sculpture of the Ten Commandments "our God". Of course, the "Christian" blogger who reports this tries to paper the truth over but I was raised Protestant and I know all about it. I remember our Sunday school teacher used to have us kneel to the Bible and pray too. So there you are! Plus, that guy just sounds to me like he worships the statue, and I have the Holy Spirit too. So I have the gift of discernment. Now, convince me that I'm wrong, you idol worshipper. And if you don't reply to me, that just proves you know I'm right and you're afraid of the truth.
Just replace "Protestant" with "Catholic" and you've read a lot of my mail over the years.
I am just worried sick about those poor Protestant idol worshippers. Why, just today I read where a Protestant let slip the Awful Truth about what they really believe: they worship statues. Oh yes, it's true. It was on the news and everything. A Protestant actually called a sculpture of the Ten Commandments "our God". Of course, the "Christian" blogger who reports this tries to paper the truth over but I was raised Protestant and I know all about it. I remember our Sunday school teacher used to have us kneel to the Bible and pray too. So there you are! Plus, that guy just sounds to me like he worships the statue, and I have the Holy Spirit too. So I have the gift of discernment. Now, convince me that I'm wrong, you idol worshipper. And if you don't reply to me, that just proves you know I'm right and you're afraid of the truth.
"It's the fastest growing religion in America!"
Adherents of Wicca and other childish fashions tout their wares with this bit of ledgerdemain. What it means is "We had ten suburban dilettantes in our coven last year and this year we have 20." A 100% growth rate! Meanwhile, Catholic faith pokes along with a mere 200,000 converts a year. The question is not "Is this the religion of tomorrow?" The question is: "Is this the religion of the day after tomorrow?"
Remember: Lies. Damned lies. Statistics.
Adherents of Wicca and other childish fashions tout their wares with this bit of ledgerdemain. What it means is "We had ten suburban dilettantes in our coven last year and this year we have 20." A 100% growth rate! Meanwhile, Catholic faith pokes along with a mere 200,000 converts a year. The question is not "Is this the religion of tomorrow?" The question is: "Is this the religion of the day after tomorrow?"
Remember: Lies. Damned lies. Statistics.
From our "Lawrence Welk Plays the Beatles" files
They don't know what's killing them.
Liberal talk radio network still forging ahead
Remember all that talk a few months back of a liberal radio network? The latest word is that it will launch in January, just in time to cover the Democratic presidential primaries. Sheldon and Anita Drobny, the Chicago venture capitalists who are putting $10 million into the launch, are said to be in talks with Janeane Garofalo, who represented the left last week during a stint as guest host on CNN’s "Crossfire." Al Franken, author of the new book "Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them: A Fair and Balanced Look at the Right," also plans to participate with a daily talk show. The Drobnys are reportedly negotiating to lease one or more New York stations from radio group owner Arthur Liu.
They don't know what's killing them.
"It reinforces the notion that these guys always win," he said. "I worry that will make it harder for some victims report their abuse."
Those are the words of David Clohessy of SNAP regarding the death--the death--of John Geoghan. Apparently, because of some stupid technicality, Geoghan's conviction could be voided because he can't present for his appeal. The man was strangled and stomped to death in prison and Clohessy sees Geoghan as the "winner". Exhibit A in the "why unforgiveness is an eternal prison" display. Geoghan is a "winner" only in Clohessy's mind. But the mind can be a very effective prison until the bars are shattered by forgivenness and the abandonment of the demand for the Victimizer to be punished by unforgiveness. Geoghan will, paradoxically, continue to have power over every victim who imitates Clohessy's mindset. Poor souls.
Like I say, Christ's teachings on sex aren't the big scandal for most people. It's his teaching on mercy and forgiveness that really outrages us.
Thanks to Dom for this.
Those are the words of David Clohessy of SNAP regarding the death--the death--of John Geoghan. Apparently, because of some stupid technicality, Geoghan's conviction could be voided because he can't present for his appeal. The man was strangled and stomped to death in prison and Clohessy sees Geoghan as the "winner". Exhibit A in the "why unforgiveness is an eternal prison" display. Geoghan is a "winner" only in Clohessy's mind. But the mind can be a very effective prison until the bars are shattered by forgivenness and the abandonment of the demand for the Victimizer to be punished by unforgiveness. Geoghan will, paradoxically, continue to have power over every victim who imitates Clohessy's mindset. Poor souls.
Like I say, Christ's teachings on sex aren't the big scandal for most people. It's his teaching on mercy and forgiveness that really outrages us.
Thanks to Dom for this.
One of the Soviet of Washington's Many Colorful Residents
I think he's bucking for Folk Hero. Still doesn't hold a candle to the Rainier Shoe Bandit though.
I think he's bucking for Folk Hero. Still doesn't hold a candle to the Rainier Shoe Bandit though.
I have a theory...
I suspect that Howard the Dean's big lead among the Dems is like being the best opera singer in Tulsa." More and more normal people are leaving the Dems. Only the fanatics and hard lefties are remaining. And so the most extreme liberal naturally is "the people's choice" in a pool of people who are rapidly losing touch with reality. Take him out of the hothouse and put him back in front of the general electorate, however, and I think he's gonna get clobbered in 2004. Dukakis/Mondale Clobbered.
I suspect that Howard the Dean's big lead among the Dems is like being the best opera singer in Tulsa." More and more normal people are leaving the Dems. Only the fanatics and hard lefties are remaining. And so the most extreme liberal naturally is "the people's choice" in a pool of people who are rapidly losing touch with reality. Take him out of the hothouse and put him back in front of the general electorate, however, and I think he's gonna get clobbered in 2004. Dukakis/Mondale Clobbered.
One last thing
Remember last year at the height of the Scandal when everybody was saying things like "If we ran the Church like a business, this sort of thing would never happen!"
Sooner or later, somebody will convince Americans that business is not the opposite of our sexually deranged culture but one of the most powerful engines of it.
The way out is not by bishops conforming themselves with even great jellolike docility to the animating spirit of Mammon, but by their conforming themselves to Christ.
Remember last year at the height of the Scandal when everybody was saying things like "If we ran the Church like a business, this sort of thing would never happen!"
Sooner or later, somebody will convince Americans that business is not the opposite of our sexually deranged culture but one of the most powerful engines of it.
The way out is not by bishops conforming themselves with even great jellolike docility to the animating spirit of Mammon, but by their conforming themselves to Christ.
Much to write today
Argue with each other about... evolution, politics, religion, and sex. Are you for or against them? Why? Give three examples.
Argue with each other about... evolution, politics, religion, and sex. Are you for or against them? Why? Give three examples.
Amy's blogged something about this Cdl. Stafford article
I would simply like to point out that the answer for what the Cardinal is looking for is found in the St. Catherine of Siena Institute article "The Parish: Mission or Maintenance". Every priest in the country needs to memorize this article, learn from the Siena Institute (which is really about the business of putting legs on the Council's teaching concerning lay vocation, charism, and collaboration with the ordained office), and act to make that vision a reality.
If you haven't had them to your parish for the Called and Gifted Workshop, you are missing out. Call them today! You will return to my blog and blubber all over me in weepy gratitude once you've heard them.
I would simply like to point out that the answer for what the Cardinal is looking for is found in the St. Catherine of Siena Institute article "The Parish: Mission or Maintenance". Every priest in the country needs to memorize this article, learn from the Siena Institute (which is really about the business of putting legs on the Council's teaching concerning lay vocation, charism, and collaboration with the ordained office), and act to make that vision a reality.
If you haven't had them to your parish for the Called and Gifted Workshop, you are missing out. Call them today! You will return to my blog and blubber all over me in weepy gratitude once you've heard them.
"I have a dream my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their .... aw, what the hell. Let's just go on judging everybody by the color of their skin. Forever and ever and ever."
Columnist attempts to square circle.
Columnist attempts to square circle.
Tuesday, August 26, 2003
I would love to see it go...
though I will miss the chance to hock a loogey at it whenever I pass by. Late at night it would be a pleasure to pee on it too. Though I've never had the opportunity.
True story: I once heard some clown on Seattle radio defend the statue against the standard "How about a statue of Hitler too" argument by saying, "Oh! But Lenin was an intellectual!"
Hey stupid: meet Dr. Joseph Goebbels. Most of the troubles of the 20th century were the creations of intellectuals. A clever mind and an evil heart is practically the definition of Satan.
though I will miss the chance to hock a loogey at it whenever I pass by. Late at night it would be a pleasure to pee on it too. Though I've never had the opportunity.
True story: I once heard some clown on Seattle radio defend the statue against the standard "How about a statue of Hitler too" argument by saying, "Oh! But Lenin was an intellectual!"
Hey stupid: meet Dr. Joseph Goebbels. Most of the troubles of the 20th century were the creations of intellectuals. A clever mind and an evil heart is practically the definition of Satan.
Catholics have this notion of Evangelicals as Rock-Ribbed Bible Christians
Sure, a bit gruff and simple, but you can always count on them to generally come down on the right side in the Culture Wars.
Well, not always. Actually, they can fall prey to Oprahfication, therapeutic theology and general squish just like the loopiest Jesuit. Here's a fascinating sample of the way Evangelicalism can go to seed.
Another fascinating way I've seen this happen is when Evangelicals go to college and get a little exposure to postmodernism, deconstruction, and nihlistic relativism. Think "Bill Bradley". Former Evangelical, now gung ho pro abort liberal. Some of the cleverer ones go toward it like a duck to water. Frightening really. I had a friend who had a long conversation with former Evangelicals, now deconstructionist atheists, who laughed at his insistence that the pile of ashes at Mauthausen had any meaning.
Much as I love Evangelicals, I don't believe there will be any such critter a century hence. The movement has no real center. Some will become Catholic/Orthodox. Those who refuse to will mutate into a gaggle of warring Oprahites, clever nihlists, and flathead Fundies. As my convert friend from Evangelicalism said, "I came to point where I could be Christian or Protestant, but not both." Eventually, Evangelicalism as a whole will reach that crisis, I think.
Sure, a bit gruff and simple, but you can always count on them to generally come down on the right side in the Culture Wars.
Well, not always. Actually, they can fall prey to Oprahfication, therapeutic theology and general squish just like the loopiest Jesuit. Here's a fascinating sample of the way Evangelicalism can go to seed.
Another fascinating way I've seen this happen is when Evangelicals go to college and get a little exposure to postmodernism, deconstruction, and nihlistic relativism. Think "Bill Bradley". Former Evangelical, now gung ho pro abort liberal. Some of the cleverer ones go toward it like a duck to water. Frightening really. I had a friend who had a long conversation with former Evangelicals, now deconstructionist atheists, who laughed at his insistence that the pile of ashes at Mauthausen had any meaning.
Much as I love Evangelicals, I don't believe there will be any such critter a century hence. The movement has no real center. Some will become Catholic/Orthodox. Those who refuse to will mutate into a gaggle of warring Oprahites, clever nihlists, and flathead Fundies. As my convert friend from Evangelicalism said, "I came to point where I could be Christian or Protestant, but not both." Eventually, Evangelicalism as a whole will reach that crisis, I think.
Cool!
You could see Mars shining like a brilliant ruby through the trees at Washington Park last weekend. Breathtaking. We live in a wonderful universe.
You could see Mars shining like a brilliant ruby through the trees at Washington Park last weekend. Breathtaking. We live in a wonderful universe.
Here's a nifty service
Pre-Paid Legal: for all your lawyerly needs.
My wife and I signed up for it a few months ago. We're having our wills drawn up but I also figured it would be handy to have an attorney on call to do all those attorneyfication thingamabobs they do without paying an arm and a leg. Provides nice peace of mind. Check it out.
Pre-Paid Legal: for all your lawyerly needs.
My wife and I signed up for it a few months ago. We're having our wills drawn up but I also figured it would be handy to have an attorney on call to do all those attorneyfication thingamabobs they do without paying an arm and a leg. Provides nice peace of mind. Check it out.
Cronkite: We're liberal because we're just so darn good
I am Walter Cronkite. I am the Impartial One. ("Let's face this one down right now: I am neither Republican nor Democrat. I am a registered independent")
These kids today. They aren't enlightened like we were back in the 60s. ("We reached our intellectual adulthood with daily close-ups of the inequality in a nation that was founded on the commitment to equality for all. So we are inclined to side with the powerless rather than the powerful.')
We don't *try* to be liberal. It's just a natural consequence of our deep goodness. ("I believe that most of us reporters are liberal, but not because we consciously have chosen that particular color in the political spectrum. More likely it is because most of us served our journalistic apprenticeships as reporters covering the seamier side of our cities -- the crimes, the tenement fires, the homeless and the hungry, the underclothed and undereducated.")
Besides, it's just a perception that we're liberal. Really, we're Impartial, like me, a reporter doing the Best Darn Job I Know How! ("The perceived liberalism of television reporters, I am convinced, is a product of the limited time given for any particular item.")
Oh, and conservatives are stoopid bigots. ("Incidentally, I looked up the definition of "liberal" in a Random House dictionary. It gave the synonyms for "liberal" as "progressive," "broad-minded," "unprejudiced," "beneficent." The antonyms it offered: "reactionary" and "intolerant.")
I am Walter Cronkite. I am the Impartial One. ("Let's face this one down right now: I am neither Republican nor Democrat. I am a registered independent")
These kids today. They aren't enlightened like we were back in the 60s. ("We reached our intellectual adulthood with daily close-ups of the inequality in a nation that was founded on the commitment to equality for all. So we are inclined to side with the powerless rather than the powerful.')
We don't *try* to be liberal. It's just a natural consequence of our deep goodness. ("I believe that most of us reporters are liberal, but not because we consciously have chosen that particular color in the political spectrum. More likely it is because most of us served our journalistic apprenticeships as reporters covering the seamier side of our cities -- the crimes, the tenement fires, the homeless and the hungry, the underclothed and undereducated.")
Besides, it's just a perception that we're liberal. Really, we're Impartial, like me, a reporter doing the Best Darn Job I Know How! ("The perceived liberalism of television reporters, I am convinced, is a product of the limited time given for any particular item.")
Oh, and conservatives are stoopid bigots. ("Incidentally, I looked up the definition of "liberal" in a Random House dictionary. It gave the synonyms for "liberal" as "progressive," "broad-minded," "unprejudiced," "beneficent." The antonyms it offered: "reactionary" and "intolerant.")
Dom Bettinelli Makes a Good Point
While he was alive, John Geoghan was, you see, an abusive priest of "victims", "youths", "children", "teens" "adolescents" and other sexless beings whose maleness was a sheer coincidence. Homosexuality had absolutely nothing to do with it. But now that he's dead he is a victim of "anti-gay hate crime". No word yet on when canonization proceedings for the latest martyr to the Homosexual Cause begin. Sts. Matthew Shepherd and Brandon Teena, ora pro nobis.
While he was alive, John Geoghan was, you see, an abusive priest of "victims", "youths", "children", "teens" "adolescents" and other sexless beings whose maleness was a sheer coincidence. Homosexuality had absolutely nothing to do with it. But now that he's dead he is a victim of "anti-gay hate crime". No word yet on when canonization proceedings for the latest martyr to the Homosexual Cause begin. Sts. Matthew Shepherd and Brandon Teena, ora pro nobis.
Miles Jesu Does Good Work
So good that Dan Brown will probably target them in his next illiterate screed of a novel against the Church.
So good that Dan Brown will probably target them in his next illiterate screed of a novel against the Church.
WSJ on Gay Bishops
Yes. Homosexuality is not the only sin. But the entire point is that nobody is saying gluttony or gossiping is a virtue, a sacrament, patriotic, and the "pinnacle of evolution" or that impenitent advocates and practitioners of these sins should be given a mitre precisely *because* they practice them. The gay brownshirts are insisting we swallow all that. Don't muddy the waters with the "there are other sins, you know" rhetoric.
Yes. Homosexuality is not the only sin. But the entire point is that nobody is saying gluttony or gossiping is a virtue, a sacrament, patriotic, and the "pinnacle of evolution" or that impenitent advocates and practitioners of these sins should be given a mitre precisely *because* they practice them. The gay brownshirts are insisting we swallow all that. Don't muddy the waters with the "there are other sins, you know" rhetoric.
How a blog is maintained
I know that people would like to think that I have 8 full hours a day to pore over each and every entry in the comments boxes, lovingly lavishing my full attention on each thought, each turn of phrase, each link, and each and every point. I know that the only conceivable explanation for my failure to do this, and to draft full replies to each and every comment, is that I am a wicked person who fears the truth and dodges anything that challenges me.
Nonetheless, the real story is a bit more prosaic. I dash off thoughts based on news stories I run across or whatever occurred to me in the shower this morning. Much of it is thought in via, ideas I'm still working through, opinions I'm not quite sure about, stuff that amused me. As I have time, I blast through immense numbers of comments to get the gist. Sometimes, I reply. Often, I'm thinking, "I have to get going on the Bible study/column/article/pile of email. Oh well, I guess this is good enough" and hit send.
Moral: You are not the center of the universe. My failure to reply to your incredibly brilliant and crushing rejoinder that shows me up for the fool and scoundrel I am might very well be due to the fact that I just never really noticed it because I've got so much stuff I'm trying to do on very limited time. Or, if I did notice it, I might have said, "I have to get that Bible study written. Oh well..." and skipped it.
I know that people would like to think that I have 8 full hours a day to pore over each and every entry in the comments boxes, lovingly lavishing my full attention on each thought, each turn of phrase, each link, and each and every point. I know that the only conceivable explanation for my failure to do this, and to draft full replies to each and every comment, is that I am a wicked person who fears the truth and dodges anything that challenges me.
Nonetheless, the real story is a bit more prosaic. I dash off thoughts based on news stories I run across or whatever occurred to me in the shower this morning. Much of it is thought in via, ideas I'm still working through, opinions I'm not quite sure about, stuff that amused me. As I have time, I blast through immense numbers of comments to get the gist. Sometimes, I reply. Often, I'm thinking, "I have to get going on the Bible study/column/article/pile of email. Oh well, I guess this is good enough" and hit send.
Moral: You are not the center of the universe. My failure to reply to your incredibly brilliant and crushing rejoinder that shows me up for the fool and scoundrel I am might very well be due to the fact that I just never really noticed it because I've got so much stuff I'm trying to do on very limited time. Or, if I did notice it, I might have said, "I have to get that Bible study written. Oh well..." and skipped it.
Cardinals Rodriguez and Glemp make fools of themselves
"Would a cardinal who advocated gay marriage or abortion not be defrocked?"
Actually, the answer is quite probably "no". Has Dershowitz not been paying attention? Excommunication and "defrocking" (I'm not clear if he means "depriving somebody of Holy Orders" or "depriving somebody of the Red Hat") are very seldom used radical surgery. Sorry, but that's just a fact of life in the Church.
"Would a cardinal who advocated gay marriage or abortion not be defrocked?"
Actually, the answer is quite probably "no". Has Dershowitz not been paying attention? Excommunication and "defrocking" (I'm not clear if he means "depriving somebody of Holy Orders" or "depriving somebody of the Red Hat") are very seldom used radical surgery. Sorry, but that's just a fact of life in the Church.
The Spiritual Side of the Terminator
He gives lots of money to Cdl. Mahony and goes to a fashionable parish, so why does support for abortion matter?
He gives lots of money to Cdl. Mahony and goes to a fashionable parish, so why does support for abortion matter?
Oh dear. Made more readers mad at me
Somebody wants to send me love beads cuz I once again expressed my misgivings about our involvement in Iraq.
Good one. You sure have my number. What an America Hater I am.
Now, getting back to the Catholic faith and a Catholic anthropology: One aspect of Just War Theory is "Will things be better after the war than before?" Not *immediately* after (and we are still in the "immediately after" phase), but "long term after".
One of the things that has consistently bugged me about this war (and I extend my apologies in advance to those who think I should just shut up and cheer) is that I don't think a culture with a TV-conditioned attention span has any clear idea how to deal with a culture whose memory extends to the Crusades. I am skeptical of our ability to *stay with the problem*. I wish I could just say "the Pope is an idiot" along with all True Patriots[TM], but I keep finding these annoying little burrs in my soul that make me question the wisdom of this war and of the confident declaration that we will seed Iraqi soil with western democracy and it will all be wonderful. I frankly don't see much chance of it myself. I see an Iraq that remains a basket case or another Islamic regime. And when the only response is "Shut up, you stupid hippy" I'm less than convinced that there are good replies from those who think otherwise.
The best service you can render your country is to keep it in touch with reality. The reality is that Islamic soil is notoriously resistant to western notions of the freedom and dignity of the human person. That's to be expected since Islam is also resistant to these notions. In Islam, we have a *very* large nut to crack indeed and notions that "American Can-Do Spirit" will take care of this in a jiffy are Fukayaman in their naivete. The only sure cure for a diseased spirituality is not secularism but a healthy spirituality. That's the little factor that's being left out of the calculations of secular Americans (and secularized Christians) who put their trust entirely in chariots and horses. That, I think, is what we will discover in the long run.
Comments boxes are for screaming in. Feel free.
Somebody wants to send me love beads cuz I once again expressed my misgivings about our involvement in Iraq.
Good one. You sure have my number. What an America Hater I am.
Now, getting back to the Catholic faith and a Catholic anthropology: One aspect of Just War Theory is "Will things be better after the war than before?" Not *immediately* after (and we are still in the "immediately after" phase), but "long term after".
One of the things that has consistently bugged me about this war (and I extend my apologies in advance to those who think I should just shut up and cheer) is that I don't think a culture with a TV-conditioned attention span has any clear idea how to deal with a culture whose memory extends to the Crusades. I am skeptical of our ability to *stay with the problem*. I wish I could just say "the Pope is an idiot" along with all True Patriots[TM], but I keep finding these annoying little burrs in my soul that make me question the wisdom of this war and of the confident declaration that we will seed Iraqi soil with western democracy and it will all be wonderful. I frankly don't see much chance of it myself. I see an Iraq that remains a basket case or another Islamic regime. And when the only response is "Shut up, you stupid hippy" I'm less than convinced that there are good replies from those who think otherwise.
The best service you can render your country is to keep it in touch with reality. The reality is that Islamic soil is notoriously resistant to western notions of the freedom and dignity of the human person. That's to be expected since Islam is also resistant to these notions. In Islam, we have a *very* large nut to crack indeed and notions that "American Can-Do Spirit" will take care of this in a jiffy are Fukayaman in their naivete. The only sure cure for a diseased spirituality is not secularism but a healthy spirituality. That's the little factor that's being left out of the calculations of secular Americans (and secularized Christians) who put their trust entirely in chariots and horses. That, I think, is what we will discover in the long run.
Comments boxes are for screaming in. Feel free.
Mel's distribution problem is solved
Professional handwringers continue to do the thing they do best.
Professional handwringers continue to do the thing they do best.
Episcopal Spine Alert!
"Bishop Fred Henry of the Catholic Diocese of Calgary recently warned that Chretien, a Catholic like many top federal politicians in Canada, may burn in hell for his stand. ''He is making a morally grave error,'' Henry said. ''I pray for the prime minister's soul because I think his eternal salvation is in jeopardy.''
Also, amusing is the nervousness of the gay brownshirt, who thought they could ram this down the public's throat by judicial fiat and are now acting like bullies surprised at the thought they may have to stand and fight.
But most grotesque is Chretien himself and his absurd coda: "At the end of the day, we have to live up to our responsibility." Responsibility to whom? The electorate doesn't want it. That's why all the judicial fiat and subterfuge. Responsibility to Tradition then? Heh! Nope. Responsibility to a few utopians who Know What's Best.
"Bishop Fred Henry of the Catholic Diocese of Calgary recently warned that Chretien, a Catholic like many top federal politicians in Canada, may burn in hell for his stand. ''He is making a morally grave error,'' Henry said. ''I pray for the prime minister's soul because I think his eternal salvation is in jeopardy.''
Also, amusing is the nervousness of the gay brownshirt, who thought they could ram this down the public's throat by judicial fiat and are now acting like bullies surprised at the thought they may have to stand and fight.
But most grotesque is Chretien himself and his absurd coda: "At the end of the day, we have to live up to our responsibility." Responsibility to whom? The electorate doesn't want it. That's why all the judicial fiat and subterfuge. Responsibility to Tradition then? Heh! Nope. Responsibility to a few utopians who Know What's Best.
A smart reader writes regarding last Sunday's Ephesians 5 reading ("Wives, be subject"):
Some courage. The line is optional anyway.
By the way, I'm a huge believer in voting with your feet if your parish is a constant source of lousy liturgy and heresy. If I were single, my philosophy might be "Stay and fight". But my first duty is to my family and to see that I don't raise a brood of numbskulls whose heads are filled with AmChurch twaddle. We made the haj from our old parish to Blessed Sacrament (fond salute) after a year or so of "God made your nose" catechesis and a homily or two in which the priest declared that the epistle to the Hebrews was "a crock". In urban areas, this should be one of the first remedies a beleaguered family makes use of. Find a good parish, even if its across town.
The priest at my parish did not avoid the subject, oh no.
He came out for removing the line from the readings, and of course he congratulated himself on his courage.
Needless to say I'm looking for a new church.
Some courage. The line is optional anyway.
By the way, I'm a huge believer in voting with your feet if your parish is a constant source of lousy liturgy and heresy. If I were single, my philosophy might be "Stay and fight". But my first duty is to my family and to see that I don't raise a brood of numbskulls whose heads are filled with AmChurch twaddle. We made the haj from our old parish to Blessed Sacrament (fond salute) after a year or so of "God made your nose" catechesis and a homily or two in which the priest declared that the epistle to the Hebrews was "a crock". In urban areas, this should be one of the first remedies a beleaguered family makes use of. Find a good parish, even if its across town.
I'm getting mixed signals. What's the story here?
Some of my readers tell me the bishop of St. Petersburg has filed a protest on behalf of Terri Schiavo, this story suggests the FLA bishops are all mum.
Some of my readers tell me the bishop of St. Petersburg has filed a protest on behalf of Terri Schiavo, this story suggests the FLA bishops are all mum.
A decentralized group of individuals who have to deal with one another repeatedly will tend as a matter of self-interest to evolve norms of honesty and reliability. That is, reputation, whether for honesty or fair dealing or product quality, is an asset that self-interested individuals will seek to acquire. While religion may encourage them, a hierarchical source of rules is not necessary. - Francis Fukayama
Francis, memorize this phrase: "mystery of evil".
Francis, memorize this phrase: "mystery of evil".
More Signs of Hope!
A reader sends along this note:
The latter is especially heartening to me since I've corresponded with Bill in the past and did not know he'd returned to the Church. His music is very good. Check it out.
A reader sends along this note:
First episcopal-priest-prog.-rocker Kemper Crabb preaches the Eucharist to the Cornerstone crowd (Kemper Crabb - The Implications of the Eucharist for the Arts)
and then flat-broke-critics-darling-Catholic-revert Bill Mallonee gives the Phantom Tollbooth crowd more Eucharistic theology to ponder.
The latter is especially heartening to me since I've corresponded with Bill in the past and did not know he'd returned to the Church. His music is very good. Check it out.
Iraqi Civilians Keep Dying, No WMDs Found Yet, Peace and Prosperity at Hand
Just a reminder: our grandchildren will still be in Iraq 50 years from now. I doubt very much that a culture with the historical perspective of a fruitfly is really going to be able to pull that off. I doubt even more that anything like a free society will be able to grow in that barren soil.
Just a reminder: our grandchildren will still be in Iraq 50 years from now. I doubt very much that a culture with the historical perspective of a fruitfly is really going to be able to pull that off. I doubt even more that anything like a free society will be able to grow in that barren soil.
Join the "We Want Catholic Radio" Drive
Do you want Catholic Radio available to every single person in the United States? So do we! There are around 1600 Protestant Radio Stations in the US while there are just over 50 Catholic stations. This means that Catholic Radio is available to less then 5% of all Americans.
By using the new technology of Satellite Radio there is a very real possibility that Catholic Radio will be available to every single American. XM Satellite Radio is to Radio what Cable was television 10 or 15 years ago. Now Cable is pervasive and XM will also be in the near future.
XM, the worlds largest Satellite Radio provider is currently reviewing its lineup and is looking for that next great niche. That niche is YOU. Do you want Catholic Radio in your hometown? Do you already have Catholic. Radio but easily drive out of its signal? Do you have friends, neighbors, relatives, or acquaintances across the country that don't have Catholic Radio but desperately need it?
Now's your chance. Let's tell everyone you know, and most importantly tell XM Satellite Radio, that Catholics are the last unserved niche in American media.
Ave Maria radio offers the finest Catholic Radio programming available. Meet daily with Jeff Cavins from Morning Air; Dr. Ray Guarendi and Coleen Mast; Greg and Lisa Popcak; Al Kresta and of course, Jerry Usher and the Catholic Answers gang. Not to mention our many other daily programs featuring Scott Hahn, Tim Staples, Sr. Ann Shields, Ralph Martin, Steve Wood, Johnette Benkovic, Tim Delaura, Fr. Al Lauer, and more.
Ave Maria Radio is interactive, life application radio for you and your family. Fill in this form and spread the word! Let's let XM Satellite Radio know that Catholics want Catholic Radio on the XM line-up!
Do you want Catholic Radio available to every single person in the United States? So do we! There are around 1600 Protestant Radio Stations in the US while there are just over 50 Catholic stations. This means that Catholic Radio is available to less then 5% of all Americans.
By using the new technology of Satellite Radio there is a very real possibility that Catholic Radio will be available to every single American. XM Satellite Radio is to Radio what Cable was television 10 or 15 years ago. Now Cable is pervasive and XM will also be in the near future.
XM, the worlds largest Satellite Radio provider is currently reviewing its lineup and is looking for that next great niche. That niche is YOU. Do you want Catholic Radio in your hometown? Do you already have Catholic. Radio but easily drive out of its signal? Do you have friends, neighbors, relatives, or acquaintances across the country that don't have Catholic Radio but desperately need it?
Now's your chance. Let's tell everyone you know, and most importantly tell XM Satellite Radio, that Catholics are the last unserved niche in American media.
Ave Maria radio offers the finest Catholic Radio programming available. Meet daily with Jeff Cavins from Morning Air; Dr. Ray Guarendi and Coleen Mast; Greg and Lisa Popcak; Al Kresta and of course, Jerry Usher and the Catholic Answers gang. Not to mention our many other daily programs featuring Scott Hahn, Tim Staples, Sr. Ann Shields, Ralph Martin, Steve Wood, Johnette Benkovic, Tim Delaura, Fr. Al Lauer, and more.
Ave Maria Radio is interactive, life application radio for you and your family. Fill in this form and spread the word! Let's let XM Satellite Radio know that Catholics want Catholic Radio on the XM line-up!
Monday, August 25, 2003
In case I haven't mentioned it lately...
Eve Tushnet never fails to impress me with the sheer breadth of her intelligence and her endless interest in everything. What a breath of fresh air. God send us a thousand more like her.
Eve Tushnet never fails to impress me with the sheer breadth of her intelligence and her endless interest in everything. What a breath of fresh air. God send us a thousand more like her.
Hey All Japanese Readers
Yes. That's right. You three. I'm talking to *you*.
I'll be in Okinawa March 12-14, 2004, sponsored by Catholic Women of the Chapel, and Holy Family Parish, for a weekend seminar as the Holy Family Parish, and all Catholics of Okinawa, seek to “Deepen Our Faith”. No more details than that at present, but I look forward to coming. My first trip to Asia!
Yes. That's right. You three. I'm talking to *you*.
I'll be in Okinawa March 12-14, 2004, sponsored by Catholic Women of the Chapel, and Holy Family Parish, for a weekend seminar as the Holy Family Parish, and all Catholics of Okinawa, seek to “Deepen Our Faith”. No more details than that at present, but I look forward to coming. My first trip to Asia!
Derbyshire is right, of course.
There is a war against Christianity going on. It started when Christ was crucified.
There is a war against Christianity going on. It started when Christ was crucified.
Drink your way to health
I await the moment that some enterprising exegete proves that Jesus was actually thinking about this molecule when he said, "He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life."
Anything's possible, believe me. I know of exegetes who insist that "being born again of water and the Spirit" has *nothing* to do with sacramental baptism. You see, you are born of water (=amniotic fluid) and then you are born again of the Spirit when you ask Jesus Christ into your heart as your personal Lord and Savior.
No. Really. There is no interpretation of Scripture so far-fetched that you can't find somebody who will advocate it as the only reasonable way to read the text.
I await the moment that some enterprising exegete proves that Jesus was actually thinking about this molecule when he said, "He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life."
Anything's possible, believe me. I know of exegetes who insist that "being born again of water and the Spirit" has *nothing* to do with sacramental baptism. You see, you are born of water (=amniotic fluid) and then you are born again of the Spirit when you ask Jesus Christ into your heart as your personal Lord and Savior.
No. Really. There is no interpretation of Scripture so far-fetched that you can't find somebody who will advocate it as the only reasonable way to read the text.
Fla Bishops Plead for Paul Hill
Stony silence on Terri Schiavo.
I'm for sparing both. But the silence over Schiavo is inexplicable.
Stony silence on Terri Schiavo.
I'm for sparing both. But the silence over Schiavo is inexplicable.
Submission
A reader writes:
Paul's language is problematic for us today largely due to the fact that we are spiritually impoverished people who regard all relationships as power relationships. So we hear "submit" and we think "knuckle under". The idea of willing mutual submission in love is largely foreign to our minds. Many people even see *Christ's* act of submission as an act of cowering servility to a ferocious demon god who just liked to practice child abuse on a cosmic scale. If they think God is like that with his own Son, it's a fair bet they will automatically assume that Paul is casting the relationship between husband and wife as a relationship with the Dominator and the Cringing Slave.
In reality, of course, this is (as JPII has pointed out) the hallmark of the *fallen* relationship between man and woman, not the redeemed one. It is because of the fall, according to Genesis, that man dominates his wife and the wife is at odds with the husband. It's a consequence of sin at work in the race, not a fruit of redemption. The fruit of redemption is found, indeed, in mutual submission, which is precisely how Paul begans the meditation on marriage ("Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ"). Paul's reflection is intended to be theological. For him, marriage is a participation in the Cosmic Marriage between Christ and the Bride. In the sociological context of the first century, the remarkable thing is how liberal Paul is. He addresses women as disciple and adult moral agents, not as slaves. And the burden he lays on them is essentially, "Go on doing what you are expected to do anyway." It is to men that he chiefly addresses himself. And the demands he places on them are very counter-cultural. "Die for your wife daily. Be her servant." Try selling that in Saudi Arabia today. It was the same all over the Mediterranean world in Paul's day.
The whole preachment of Paul is founded on the conviction that love, not power, is the real basis of human relationships, because it's the real basis of our relationship with God.
A reader writes:
So yesterday's reading is the infamous "wives submit to your husbands" line from Paul. I always look forward to seeing the creative ways the priests will try to wriggle out of saying anything substantive. Most often they will completely ignore it. A couple of years ago I was at a mass where the priest began his homily by saying emphatically that he wasn't touching that one with a ten foot pole!
Yesterday though, the priest who helps out with mass on Sundays (small one-priest parish) actually tried to tackle the topic. He gave the standard defense about mutual deference and marriage as a model of Christ's relationship with us (all of which I agree with) but then went on to say how Paul should've stopped there and not used the inflammatory language and that "He could've used a bit more devine revelation there".
This struck me as an unsatisfactory commentary from an otherwise exemplary priest. And what's more, I think it highlights the problem with what has become a very troublesome passage for both clergy and congregation.
The idea of marriage as a model of our relationship with Christ makes perfect sense to me. And when reading the full passage in context it's difficult not to take it as an exhortation to mutual deference: "You wives should let your husbands pick the movie and you husbands should make sure it's a movie your wives want to see."
But beyond that Paul uses specific language that seems sexist by today's standards when perhaps he didn't need to. What say you? How should we defend/explain this?
Paul's language is problematic for us today largely due to the fact that we are spiritually impoverished people who regard all relationships as power relationships. So we hear "submit" and we think "knuckle under". The idea of willing mutual submission in love is largely foreign to our minds. Many people even see *Christ's* act of submission as an act of cowering servility to a ferocious demon god who just liked to practice child abuse on a cosmic scale. If they think God is like that with his own Son, it's a fair bet they will automatically assume that Paul is casting the relationship between husband and wife as a relationship with the Dominator and the Cringing Slave.
In reality, of course, this is (as JPII has pointed out) the hallmark of the *fallen* relationship between man and woman, not the redeemed one. It is because of the fall, according to Genesis, that man dominates his wife and the wife is at odds with the husband. It's a consequence of sin at work in the race, not a fruit of redemption. The fruit of redemption is found, indeed, in mutual submission, which is precisely how Paul begans the meditation on marriage ("Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ"). Paul's reflection is intended to be theological. For him, marriage is a participation in the Cosmic Marriage between Christ and the Bride. In the sociological context of the first century, the remarkable thing is how liberal Paul is. He addresses women as disciple and adult moral agents, not as slaves. And the burden he lays on them is essentially, "Go on doing what you are expected to do anyway." It is to men that he chiefly addresses himself. And the demands he places on them are very counter-cultural. "Die for your wife daily. Be her servant." Try selling that in Saudi Arabia today. It was the same all over the Mediterranean world in Paul's day.
The whole preachment of Paul is founded on the conviction that love, not power, is the real basis of human relationships, because it's the real basis of our relationship with God.
Liberals continue to console themselves with delusions
A friend of mine, an academic, remarks that the first thing you need to realize about intellectuals is that they were generally the sort of people who could never get a date in high school. So they consoled themselves by saying, "I don't want to go to your primitive mating ritual dances. In fact, I wouldn't go even if you asked me, for I am Thinking Great Thoughts!"
As power slips from their grasp, liberals tend to ramp up the "We are the only really intelligent people on this planet. We are the rejected ministers of a race unworthy of our greatness" schtick. They're funny, but dangerous, because they really believe this incredibly prideful crapola.
A friend of mine, an academic, remarks that the first thing you need to realize about intellectuals is that they were generally the sort of people who could never get a date in high school. So they consoled themselves by saying, "I don't want to go to your primitive mating ritual dances. In fact, I wouldn't go even if you asked me, for I am Thinking Great Thoughts!"
As power slips from their grasp, liberals tend to ramp up the "We are the only really intelligent people on this planet. We are the rejected ministers of a race unworthy of our greatness" schtick. They're funny, but dangerous, because they really believe this incredibly prideful crapola.
Another proud moment for My People
I think it would have been cooler if they'd played "Washington, My Home".
I think it would have been cooler if they'd played "Washington, My Home".
Specious reading of C of E crisis
I don't buy that this about Evangelicals suspicious of the Anglo-Catholic Romanist leanings. Judging by the rather warm relationship I have with serious Evangelical Anglicans, I think it obvious what the problem is: liberal Anglicans are demanding we all sign off on gay ordinations, marriage, abortion and all the rest of the liberal project and Evangelicals reject this stuff as the garbage it is. Thus, Evangelical (and serious Anglo-Catholics) are quite friendly toward the Catholic Church because it continues to draw the line here.
I do like the sentence "we are in the headless chicken phase" though.
I don't buy that this about Evangelicals suspicious of the Anglo-Catholic Romanist leanings. Judging by the rather warm relationship I have with serious Evangelical Anglicans, I think it obvious what the problem is: liberal Anglicans are demanding we all sign off on gay ordinations, marriage, abortion and all the rest of the liberal project and Evangelicals reject this stuff as the garbage it is. Thus, Evangelical (and serious Anglo-Catholics) are quite friendly toward the Catholic Church because it continues to draw the line here.
I do like the sentence "we are in the headless chicken phase" though.
This is simply splendid!
C.S. Lewis: Sun worshipper, Tool of Satan, Sink of Iniquity and Eeeeeeevil
It's hard to imagine a more perfectly illiterate take on Lewis that isn't actually a parody. But this site is the genuine article. Fundamentalism at its very funniest!
Thanks to Touchstone for this delightful find!
C.S. Lewis: Sun worshipper, Tool of Satan, Sink of Iniquity and Eeeeeeevil
It's hard to imagine a more perfectly illiterate take on Lewis that isn't actually a parody. But this site is the genuine article. Fundamentalism at its very funniest!
Thanks to Touchstone for this delightful find!
Proof that somebody who knows sociology...
...can still say dumb things.
I think he's got a point about the transformation of the American conception of the priesthood into a "helping profession". But you have to wade through remarks like "All traditional religious dogma is tragic" (you know, like "on the third day, he rose again in fulfillment of the Scriptures" and "We look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come" and other deeply tragic dogmas).
...can still say dumb things.
I think he's got a point about the transformation of the American conception of the priesthood into a "helping profession". But you have to wade through remarks like "All traditional religious dogma is tragic" (you know, like "on the third day, he rose again in fulfillment of the Scriptures" and "We look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come" and other deeply tragic dogmas).
Geoghan Murdered
Like Rod, I feel only sadness at this wasted and ruined life and the many other lives he wounded. May God grant him pardon and peace and may he too be found in the company of the redeemed on the last day. God has made worse sinners into vessels of his glory. May his salvation extend to John Geoghan too.
Meanwhile, the question remains: "Where the heck are the guards who are supposed to keep things like this from happening?"
My opposition to the death penalty is not absolute. Like the Pope, I think that human life should be preserved wherever possible, but that if our prison technology is insufficient to keep murderers from murdering, they should be put to death. I find it difficulty to believe we are incapable of stopping crimes like this, but if we are, then Geoghan's killer should be executed for the safety of the rest of the prison population.
Like Rod, I feel only sadness at this wasted and ruined life and the many other lives he wounded. May God grant him pardon and peace and may he too be found in the company of the redeemed on the last day. God has made worse sinners into vessels of his glory. May his salvation extend to John Geoghan too.
Meanwhile, the question remains: "Where the heck are the guards who are supposed to keep things like this from happening?"
My opposition to the death penalty is not absolute. Like the Pope, I think that human life should be preserved wherever possible, but that if our prison technology is insufficient to keep murderers from murdering, they should be put to death. I find it difficulty to believe we are incapable of stopping crimes like this, but if we are, then Geoghan's killer should be executed for the safety of the rest of the prison population.
Amazing How People Can Completely Betray Their Own Principles
I think it's caused by taking a truth revealed by God (it hardly matters which one) and then making it more important than God.
I think it's caused by taking a truth revealed by God (it hardly matters which one) and then making it more important than God.
Translation: You are Catholic and You Have Incorrect Opinions
Figured I'd try to bring in a little extra cash since things are so tight. So I applied to Google's AdSense program.
Their response:
Evidently my readers don't buy things, so advertising to them would be a waste of time. Couldn't have anything to do with corporate cowardice and fear of association with Incorrect Ideas. Oh well. It was worth a shot. But I'd rather have the incorrect ideas than the cash.
Figured I'd try to bring in a little extra cash since things are so tight. So I applied to Google's AdSense program.
Their response:
Thank you for your interest in Google AdSense. Our program specialists review all websites for a variety of criteria. These include, but are not limited to, site content, clear navigation, and the site's potential value to the AdSense program and the user experience.
We have reviewed your site and found that many of the ads that would appear on your site would not be relevant to your site's content. As the ads would not provide a valuable experience for your site's users or our advertisers, we feel that your site isn't a good fit for the AdSense program at this time.
Please feel free to reply to this email with any further questions. If you manage or own another site on which you'd like to display AdWords ads, you may reply to this email and include the URL in the message. We will then reconsider your application. If the new site complies with our program policies and is a fit for the AdSense program, we'll approve your application and allow you to run ads on that specific site.
Thank you for your understanding.
Evidently my readers don't buy things, so advertising to them would be a waste of time. Couldn't have anything to do with corporate cowardice and fear of association with Incorrect Ideas. Oh well. It was worth a shot. But I'd rather have the incorrect ideas than the cash.
The Sort of Thing That Irritates Me
A reader sends me a "question" about transubstantiation:
Actually, it *is* a mystery. We are talking about God in human flesh here, after all. And we are also talking about the author of Time. Since God is not bound by time, there's no particular reason the eucharist could not be the body and blood of the Risen Christ if God willed it so. So point 2 makes assumptions that I see no particular reason for making. Why *can't* Christ have changed the elements into his risen body and blood. He did a lot of other remarkable things. It's always a bad idea to start off an argument by telling God what is impossible for him to do. But mark that they *are* a participation in his risen body and blood--and therefore the cross and resurrection are still necessary. The eucharist flows from--not replaces--that mystery. I don't know what various priests at EWTN have said, and I would hardly make that my touchstone of the faith. Point 5 makes me think you don't really understand Catholic teaching, since we do not believe that Jesus "suffers and dies daily". Point 6 is a rather remarkable inversion of Catholic teaching. We believe that Jesus has suffered once for all in the bloody sacrifice *and* that the eucharist is the unbloody re-presentation of that sacrifice. So yes. The sacrifice happens once. But we participate in it through all eternity. If we couldn't participate in it, we couldn't be saved. The sacraments are *ways* in which we participate in it. Finally, when you reach point 7, you arrive at a conclusion which is a magnificent illustration of Chesterton's point that a madman is not a person who has lost his reason, but a person who has lost everything except his reason. For to say, "So, asserting transubstantiation in the Last Supper seems to lead to an entirely unbiblical and non-historically Christian view of the innitiating of Christ's sacrifice upon the cross; and likewise it comprimises the necessity and purpose of Christ's death on the cross" is wonderfully out of touch with both the plain meaning of Scripture *and* with the historical Christian view (which flatly accepted literal meaning of the words "this is my body" for 1000 years before it occurred to anybody to question it). All you have to do is read the Church Fathers to know that.
Come on. Be honest. You aren't writing to ask "questions". You are writing to argue a case because you've already made up your mind. I've shown you what's wrong with this particular argument. An honest man will say, "Oh, okay. I see your point." A dishonest one who is pretending to "question" but is really interested in defeating the Catholic view of the Eucharist at all costs will simply ignore what I've said and find a different avenue of attack. If you are going to do that, please: at least be honest and say, "I think you are dead wrong about the Eucharist and I mean to prove it." Don't pretend to be "questioning." It insults my intelligence.
A reader sends me a "question" about transubstantiation:
In considering becoming Catholic I have run into four or five sticky problems in Catholic teaching that I've not been able to overcome. Perhaps you can help.
Here is one, maybe you can lend a hand in. As we know, Holy Communion was first instituted at the Last Supper. If we propose (as the Catholic Church asserts) that at the Last Supper the elements transubstantiated into Christ's body and blood, then we seem to run into several difficulties:
1.) If transubstantiation were the case, the elements were being changed prior to the institution of Christ's initiating the actual sacrifice on the cross. Yet according to the Epistles (and Christ himself), it is the cross where payment for sin was accomplished / instituted.
2.) This would mean that the elements in the Last Supper could not yet have had literal sacrificial and efficacious power via transubstantiation, being offered prior to the very sacrificial offering which would institute its efficaciousness.
3.) If the Last Supper did not have efficacious power, then Christ could not have literally meant the words "this is my body" and "this is my blood of the covenant poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins." Thus the Last Supper would be symbolic and referencial only (unless His presence in the elements is spiritual and not transubstantial).
4.) If the elements were somehow changed to his body and blood at the Last Supper prior to his sacrifice on the cross, then he was already suffering and dying in the breaking of bread and by being consumed in the mouths of his disciples (just as various Catholic priests on EWTN have preached).
5.) If he was able to die (and be efficacious in that death) in the Last Supper prior to his sacrifice on the cross, then the cross is entirely unnecissary. For Christ could simply have come down, instituted the Holy Communion through which he would suffer and die daily, and gone back to heaven without dying on the cross.
6.) However, this would run against scripture, since the Eucharistic Sacrifice is a "bloodless" sacrifice; but scripture testifies that "without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness" (Heb. 9:22). Christ's death on the cross was necissary to effect redemption, fulfilling the actual sacrifice that the Old Testament symbolic sacrifices looked forward to. His crucifixion initiated all the redemptive effects and acts that would flow from it.
7.) So, asserting transubstantiation in the Last Supper seems to lead to an entirely unbiblical and non-historically Christian view of the innitiating of Christ's sacrifice upon the cross; and likewise it comprimises the necessity and purpose of Christ's death on the cross.
Any good answers? .......And please don't resort to "It's a mystery." This is important theological discussion. Besides, scripture never refers to Communion as a "mystery." "Mystery" is too easy an escape anytime one's theology runs into biblical problems. In writing this, I also recall that Orthodoxy Christianity has never sought define how Christ's real presence dwells in the elements.
Actually, it *is* a mystery. We are talking about God in human flesh here, after all. And we are also talking about the author of Time. Since God is not bound by time, there's no particular reason the eucharist could not be the body and blood of the Risen Christ if God willed it so. So point 2 makes assumptions that I see no particular reason for making. Why *can't* Christ have changed the elements into his risen body and blood. He did a lot of other remarkable things. It's always a bad idea to start off an argument by telling God what is impossible for him to do. But mark that they *are* a participation in his risen body and blood--and therefore the cross and resurrection are still necessary. The eucharist flows from--not replaces--that mystery. I don't know what various priests at EWTN have said, and I would hardly make that my touchstone of the faith. Point 5 makes me think you don't really understand Catholic teaching, since we do not believe that Jesus "suffers and dies daily". Point 6 is a rather remarkable inversion of Catholic teaching. We believe that Jesus has suffered once for all in the bloody sacrifice *and* that the eucharist is the unbloody re-presentation of that sacrifice. So yes. The sacrifice happens once. But we participate in it through all eternity. If we couldn't participate in it, we couldn't be saved. The sacraments are *ways* in which we participate in it. Finally, when you reach point 7, you arrive at a conclusion which is a magnificent illustration of Chesterton's point that a madman is not a person who has lost his reason, but a person who has lost everything except his reason. For to say, "So, asserting transubstantiation in the Last Supper seems to lead to an entirely unbiblical and non-historically Christian view of the innitiating of Christ's sacrifice upon the cross; and likewise it comprimises the necessity and purpose of Christ's death on the cross" is wonderfully out of touch with both the plain meaning of Scripture *and* with the historical Christian view (which flatly accepted literal meaning of the words "this is my body" for 1000 years before it occurred to anybody to question it). All you have to do is read the Church Fathers to know that.
Come on. Be honest. You aren't writing to ask "questions". You are writing to argue a case because you've already made up your mind. I've shown you what's wrong with this particular argument. An honest man will say, "Oh, okay. I see your point." A dishonest one who is pretending to "question" but is really interested in defeating the Catholic view of the Eucharist at all costs will simply ignore what I've said and find a different avenue of attack. If you are going to do that, please: at least be honest and say, "I think you are dead wrong about the Eucharist and I mean to prove it." Don't pretend to be "questioning." It insults my intelligence.
Friday, August 22, 2003
Article on Pius XII and the Nazis
By the way, a word on "concordats". People have this notion that a concordat means Rome says to some regime: "Hey! We think you are the bee's knees! Love ya! Love what ya do!"
In fact, concordats are essentially wary truces with regimes that Rome knows perfectly well would like to stamp out Catholic faith. The basic reason for the concordat with Nazi Germany was the same reason as the sought for concordat with Stalin's USSR: the Church was trying to preserve the safety and worship of the flock under a criminal regime, not giving the Big Stamp of Approval to the Regime.
By the way, a word on "concordats". People have this notion that a concordat means Rome says to some regime: "Hey! We think you are the bee's knees! Love ya! Love what ya do!"
In fact, concordats are essentially wary truces with regimes that Rome knows perfectly well would like to stamp out Catholic faith. The basic reason for the concordat with Nazi Germany was the same reason as the sought for concordat with Stalin's USSR: the Church was trying to preserve the safety and worship of the flock under a criminal regime, not giving the Big Stamp of Approval to the Regime.
Haloscan Found Riding Zebras and Chasing Springboks at Seattle Woodland Park Zoo African Savannah Exhibit
A resident of the zoo (pictured below) is quoted as saying, "Haloscan was quiet. Very quiet. Kind of a loner. Kept to herself. We never thought she'd do anything like this."
Neighbors heard her scream, "I just wanted to see the Jimi Hendrix Memorial from a different perspective! Love you, Jimi! Miss you! Wanna *be* you!" before she was forced in the police cruiser.
The Memorial is found in the zoo near the African Savannah exhibit. Honest!
Haloscan will be back when somebody posts bail.
A resident of the zoo (pictured below) is quoted as saying, "Haloscan was quiet. Very quiet. Kind of a loner. Kept to herself. We never thought she'd do anything like this."
Neighbors heard her scream, "I just wanted to see the Jimi Hendrix Memorial from a different perspective! Love you, Jimi! Miss you! Wanna *be* you!" before she was forced in the police cruiser.
The Memorial is found in the zoo near the African Savannah exhibit. Honest!
Haloscan will be back when somebody posts bail.
Thursday, August 21, 2003
Scarce this weekend. Off frolicking in forest, sand and surf
Up near Anacortes. Last hurrah for summer. Chance for kidlets to mingle with peers. Mom and Dad to do same.
Ahhhh.
Will report back on Monday. You kids don't put no beans up your noses.
Up near Anacortes. Last hurrah for summer. Chance for kidlets to mingle with peers. Mom and Dad to do same.
Ahhhh.
Will report back on Monday. You kids don't put no beans up your noses.
You have a car that you have taken care of and you want to sell it
You put an ad in the paper listing it for sale and stating that you only want to sell it to somebody who will take equal care of it. Caesar commands you that you must sell it the Demolition Derby.
You have a Catholic hospital. You built it from scratch. You have to sell. You don't want the facility you built to be used as a slaughterhouse for babies
A newly signed law in California will keep not-for-profit hospitals from including future service restrictions when they sell their facilities. Gov. Gray "Nothing will happen to me today that Moloch and I can't handle together" Davis signed a law in late July that prohibits the state attorney general from approving the sale of a not-for-profit hospital if the deal includes limits on what services can be provided at the facility by the new owner.
I hope Davis gets his ass kicked in this recall.
You put an ad in the paper listing it for sale and stating that you only want to sell it to somebody who will take equal care of it. Caesar commands you that you must sell it the Demolition Derby.
You have a Catholic hospital. You built it from scratch. You have to sell. You don't want the facility you built to be used as a slaughterhouse for babies
A newly signed law in California will keep not-for-profit hospitals from including future service restrictions when they sell their facilities. Gov. Gray "Nothing will happen to me today that Moloch and I can't handle together" Davis signed a law in late July that prohibits the state attorney general from approving the sale of a not-for-profit hospital if the deal includes limits on what services can be provided at the facility by the new owner.
I hope Davis gets his ass kicked in this recall.
Overheard...
A distant relation from out of state was complaining about our famous drizzliness here in Seattle. She said, in all seriousness, "The weather here sucks! They even have a mountain called 'Rainier'!"
A distant relation from out of state was complaining about our famous drizzliness here in Seattle. She said, in all seriousness, "The weather here sucks! They even have a mountain called 'Rainier'!"
It's Payback Time
or, why the Islamic world is backward, resentful, ignorant, and mired in the past. American "slavery reparations" advocates take note. That way madness lies.
or, why the Islamic world is backward, resentful, ignorant, and mired in the past. American "slavery reparations" advocates take note. That way madness lies.
Catholic Cardinal Utters Perfectly Truthful Catholic Teaching at Catholic University
"Disgraceful"
"I am bitter"
"RESIST!"
... and other views from the stunned and clueless Catholics who were horrified to hear that families are sacred.
Favorite quote: "Meanwhile, Joylynn Holder (CAS '03) did what many more had done: she stayed in her seat, aghast and uncomfortable. "I just didn't expect it at all," she said. "I was shocked." A theology major, Holder wondered what her professors were thinking about what she considered "undeveloped theology" represented by Arinze's comments."
Boy, those bone-in-the-nose Africans. They're not the enlightened holders of Developed Theology like comfy suburban American theology grads. The White Girl's Burden.
"Disgraceful"
"I am bitter"
"RESIST!"
... and other views from the stunned and clueless Catholics who were horrified to hear that families are sacred.
Favorite quote: "Meanwhile, Joylynn Holder (CAS '03) did what many more had done: she stayed in her seat, aghast and uncomfortable. "I just didn't expect it at all," she said. "I was shocked." A theology major, Holder wondered what her professors were thinking about what she considered "undeveloped theology" represented by Arinze's comments."
Boy, those bone-in-the-nose Africans. They're not the enlightened holders of Developed Theology like comfy suburban American theology grads. The White Girl's Burden.
A Note from Greg Popcak Regarding Questions About His Work
Oops. My bad about the imprimatur business. I stand corrected.
Dear Friends,
I wanted to take a brief moment to respond to some of the concerns that have been expressed about my work. The following is by no means intended to be a complete response, and in fact, the best response I can make has already been written in the seven books I have penned. If you want to know what I think, go read them. Rather, this is intended to assist those with legitimate questions and who are seeking the truth, as opposed to those who would rather wallow in gossip, and lies. If you are the former, I invite your further questions. If you are the latter, let's not waste our time.
1. The Brother/Sister charting question.
The paragraph in question has been reprinted on this blog, so I will not repost it here.
First, I genuinely could not care less if you use this technique in your family or not. The ONLY reason I included it in the book is that I was aware that some families, with mature children, are already doing this. I felt it would be a service to those families to provide guidelines regarding modesty and propriety so that such a technique could be done in the most respectful way possible.
I do feel somewhat favorably toward it because--done properly and respectfully--it can demystify the sexual cycle, and the Holy Father tells us, in Love and Responsibility (c.f., the section on Sexology), that giving such information about both the goodness of the body and how the body functions is a good and useful thing. However, I also understand that some children are not mature enough to handle such an execise, and some families would not think it appropriate. This is why I leave it to parental discretion. I stand by what I wrote.
Personally, I cannot say whether I would ever use such a technique in my own family or not. It would require prayer and consultation with my wife, and would have to take into account the psychological maturity of my children.
If you choose to use this idea, fine--just please be mindful of modesty and propriety. If, alternatively, the idea offends you, then ignore it altogether. It is one paragraph in a two-hundred-plus page book and the rest of the work hardly stands or falls on the one idea, which did not even originate with me, but rather, was the idea of many other families. And because I respect the wisdom of families, who are the first teachers, and not just professionals, who are--at best--helpers, I included the idea, with appropriate cautions.
2. The Deepak Chopra Issue.
The Deepak Chopra quote is found in The Exceptional Seven Percent: Nine Secrets of the World's Happiest Couples. It is a secular book and it is intended for a secular audience. I have never pretended otherwise.
My intention in addressing the issue in The Exceptional Seven Percent is that personalities like Chopra are leading people away from Christianity by making them think that nuptial imagery is something that can only be found outside of Christianity. My intention was to show that Christians do not fear sex and that there is much wisdom about nuptial imagery to be found in the Christian, and in particular, Catholic, tradition. I used the shocking language of the secular world as an evangelistic tool. It was a literary device intended to engage a specific & secular audience. That's as far as it goes.
I could hardly launch into a nuanced discussion on the Theology of the Body in a secular book. My only hope was that secular people would be interested in the concept and ask questions. And, by asking questions, be led to a deeper understanding of the bold teachings of the Church, and in particular, the Theology of the Body.
3. My Relationship with The Hahns (?).
What relationship?
I simply don't know where this comes from. I never quoted them in any of my books, except for the one phrase that, "a couple should celebrate a love so profound that, in nine months, it has to be given its own name." That's Scott's, and I credit him. Otherwise, I've never cited him. And, for the record, I haven't had a chance to read First Comes Love, so I don't know what he wrote. I look forward to reading it in the future, however.
As for being friends. I would say that we know each other well enough to say "hi" in the grocery store, but our paths just don't cross that much. He does scripture. I do therapy. You do the math.
4. Imprimatur.
Because my books are not catechetical in nature, they do not require the Imprimatur. I have, however, out of respect for magisterial authority on the issue, submitted Beyond the Birds and the Bees (the most catechetical of my books) to the ecclesial approbation process. I am pleased to say that the censor librorum has recommended this work to the Bishop for the Imprimatur, having found nothing contrary to the faith.
Beyond this, however, all of my Catholic books have undergone extensive theological review by competent, faithful, professional theologians, and in at least one case, by a panel consisting of a priest who is the only North American member of the Pontifical Theological Academy. At no time, has any one of these competent, faithful professionals ever indicated a problem with my work. I am grateful for their guidance.
Finally, if anyone has any respectful questions, it isn't as if I am hiding. Email me. I will be happy to address any charitably expressed concerns.
God Bless,
Greg Popcak
Oops. My bad about the imprimatur business. I stand corrected.
Sadly, another commenter has found himself unable to comment
...though he is still welcome to read, to donate generously to PayPal, and to buy my stuff (all of which I'm certain he will do).
Just a note to all commenters: You are guests in my living room, here on my unutterably magnanimous sufferance and generosity as Holy Roman Emperor of This Here Blog. If you tick me off for some reason, I throw you out of my living room. Feel free to whine all you like about "censorship" and "free speech" as you slide face first across the cyber front lawn, pick yourself up, and limp toward your car. I don't owe you a forum. Subscribe to my relatively beneficent dictatorship and obey the Rules of Civilized Discourse (which unfortunately don't include allowances for assassinating the reputation of my friends) or practice your free speech somewhere else. Sincere apologies are always accepted and commenting rights graciously restored thereupon. Such is the splendor of my clemency as Holy Roman Emperor. But do make that extra effort not to tread with hobnailed boot upon my tremendous generosity and forebearance, won't you?
...though he is still welcome to read, to donate generously to PayPal, and to buy my stuff (all of which I'm certain he will do).
Just a note to all commenters: You are guests in my living room, here on my unutterably magnanimous sufferance and generosity as Holy Roman Emperor of This Here Blog. If you tick me off for some reason, I throw you out of my living room. Feel free to whine all you like about "censorship" and "free speech" as you slide face first across the cyber front lawn, pick yourself up, and limp toward your car. I don't owe you a forum. Subscribe to my relatively beneficent dictatorship and obey the Rules of Civilized Discourse (which unfortunately don't include allowances for assassinating the reputation of my friends) or practice your free speech somewhere else. Sincere apologies are always accepted and commenting rights graciously restored thereupon. Such is the splendor of my clemency as Holy Roman Emperor. But do make that extra effort not to tread with hobnailed boot upon my tremendous generosity and forebearance, won't you?
Deal Hudson on The Passion
Sounds like a "blame it all on the Jews" film to me.
One of the two glimpses of Gibson in the movie is when you see his hand placing the stake on Christ's palm - thus underlining Gibson's own guilt, which in Christian theology he shares with all mankind, for the death of Christ.
Sounds like a "blame it all on the Jews" film to me.
A reader writes:
No deep thoughts really. Just the obvious observation that we have trouble sorting such matters out even in our own hearts, so we're really in a lousy position to sort them out for others.
In the comments boxes on Tuesday, Al mentioned what he saw as a gap between our modern trust in the mitigating influence of culture and society on the guilt of our sin, versus the objective mitigating influence of invincible error. You didn't follow up on this and I thought it might make an interesting topic for discussion. What is your take on this? Does societal influence, poor catechesis, the power of media and the like lessen the guilt of our own sins? What do moral theologians say? What makes ignorance invincible? Interesting.
No deep thoughts really. Just the obvious observation that we have trouble sorting such matters out even in our own hearts, so we're really in a lousy position to sort them out for others.
Hey Mel! Fly St. Blog's to Hollywood!
David Heddle writes:
I like the idea, but highly doubt it will happen. Parishioners at St. Blog's might try contacting ICON productions (if you can find their website) and alerting them to the existence of St. Blog's and the largely sympathetic media outlet they have left untapped. Be sure to tell 'em I'd love to see it! Free trip to Hollywood here we come! :)
David Heddle writes:
On my blog today I suggested that Mel Gibson arrange for a showing of The Passion for Christian bloggers. The suggestion was intended as tongue-in-cheek, but the more I think about it the more it makes sense. The film has been getting a lot of bad ink. It would be nice to fire up the Christian bloggers who, from everything I hear, would be nearly universally supportive. What do you think?
I like the idea, but highly doubt it will happen. Parishioners at St. Blog's might try contacting ICON productions (if you can find their website) and alerting them to the existence of St. Blog's and the largely sympathetic media outlet they have left untapped. Be sure to tell 'em I'd love to see it! Free trip to Hollywood here we come! :)
Various Interesting Stuff Over at NC Register...
...including an interview with Al Kresta, for whom many of you prayed. He credits you (and God, of course) with saving his life through those prayers. So thanks!
...including an interview with Al Kresta, for whom many of you prayed. He credits you (and God, of course) with saving his life through those prayers. So thanks!
Only four more days to get your registration in for "Out in the Desert: A Wellspring of Hope," a big official gay Catholic conference!!!!
This is the National Assn of Catholic Diocesan Lesbian and Gay Ministries. It claims to be in "communication with" the USCCB. Here are some links on its website.
You will, no doubt, be stunned to discover that Courage is not mentioned. There are, however, the requisite "Fight Hate" and "Partners Against Hate" links. Must be for teaching gays not to beat the crap out of janitors or to threaten jailtime for people with incorrect thoughts. Because, you know, people who think homosexual practice is a sin are just so hateful.
This is the National Assn of Catholic Diocesan Lesbian and Gay Ministries. It claims to be in "communication with" the USCCB. Here are some links on its website.
You will, no doubt, be stunned to discover that Courage is not mentioned. There are, however, the requisite "Fight Hate" and "Partners Against Hate" links. Must be for teaching gays not to beat the crap out of janitors or to threaten jailtime for people with incorrect thoughts. Because, you know, people who think homosexual practice is a sin are just so hateful.
EWTN's going to run an interview with Cdl. Ratzinger
For those of you with the Tube. I expect you might be able to stream it over the web too.
For those of you with the Tube. I expect you might be able to stream it over the web too.
Problem: AmChurch in Trouble. See if you can guess the Solution: O _ D _ _ N Women, _ B _ L _ S H Celibacy, and C _ N _ _ _ C _ P T _ V _ _ for All!
It's a toughy. You may have to think hard. Two hints: It's in the NY Times and it's by Garry Wills.
It's a toughy. You may have to think hard. Two hints: It's in the NY Times and it's by Garry Wills.
The Death of 2-D Animation?
My guess is that they'll bring it back like "Classic Coke" after everybody gets sick of CGI.
My guess is that they'll bring it back like "Classic Coke" after everybody gets sick of CGI.
"We wrestle not with flesh and blood..."
As you know, I do not believe in Grand Conspiracy Theories. I should, however, clarify that I am speaking humanly when I say this. I do not believe in Illuminati, Trilateral Commissions, black helicopters, and all the other junk which supposed a centuries old group of human beings is manipulating history to produce some evil outcome from which the original authors will never benefit.
I do however believe (since revelation bid me to believe) that there is such a thing as a demonic conspiracy to destroy the human race, to harm creation as much as possible, and to thwart the work of God in the world.
This conspiracy is, of course, an open book to God. It's just not an open book to us. So we tend to identify this conspiracy with human beings, political movements and so forth. But there is always something a bit chimerical about that. The human agents who cooperate most wilfully with evil often don't seem to know themselves why they do what they do. They just insist on doing it. And, of course, since evil is always ultimately suicidal there's only so far you can go with the "self interest" explanations.
I'm prompted to reflect on this by this article which once again shows how large, prosperous, well-educated people can somehow find themselves moving in fundamentally destructive directions just by being ordinary people living out the workaday logic of original sin and obeying the workaday logic of the Prince of This World. A little Mammon worship, a little veneration for Received Conventional Wisdom of the World and, before you can bleat three times like a lamb to the slaughter, you are at war with life and cooperating in making your children good stupid cannon fodder for Leviathan.
I doubt very much that there is some controlling human power at work behind this. I believe (because Eph 6:12 says I should) that there is indeed a manipulating demonic power (actually something more like network of "Powers and Principalities") at work. And I firmly believe that *only* the power of Christ is capable of making effective war on that network.
As you know, I do not believe in Grand Conspiracy Theories. I should, however, clarify that I am speaking humanly when I say this. I do not believe in Illuminati, Trilateral Commissions, black helicopters, and all the other junk which supposed a centuries old group of human beings is manipulating history to produce some evil outcome from which the original authors will never benefit.
I do however believe (since revelation bid me to believe) that there is such a thing as a demonic conspiracy to destroy the human race, to harm creation as much as possible, and to thwart the work of God in the world.
For we are not contending against flesh and blood, but against the principalities, against the powers, against the world rulers of this present darkness, against the spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places. Eph 6:12)
This conspiracy is, of course, an open book to God. It's just not an open book to us. So we tend to identify this conspiracy with human beings, political movements and so forth. But there is always something a bit chimerical about that. The human agents who cooperate most wilfully with evil often don't seem to know themselves why they do what they do. They just insist on doing it. And, of course, since evil is always ultimately suicidal there's only so far you can go with the "self interest" explanations.
I'm prompted to reflect on this by this article which once again shows how large, prosperous, well-educated people can somehow find themselves moving in fundamentally destructive directions just by being ordinary people living out the workaday logic of original sin and obeying the workaday logic of the Prince of This World. A little Mammon worship, a little veneration for Received Conventional Wisdom of the World and, before you can bleat three times like a lamb to the slaughter, you are at war with life and cooperating in making your children good stupid cannon fodder for Leviathan.
I doubt very much that there is some controlling human power at work behind this. I believe (because Eph 6:12 says I should) that there is indeed a manipulating demonic power (actually something more like network of "Powers and Principalities") at work. And I firmly believe that *only* the power of Christ is capable of making effective war on that network.
Canadian Supporters of Gay Marriage Oppose Democracy
"Let's just ram it down the throats of the electorate and be done with it."
"Let's just ram it down the throats of the electorate and be done with it."
"I have faith in God," Davis told a town hall audience here, showing a rare personal side. "I carry a little card around with me that says, 'Nothing will happen to me today that the Lord and I can't handle together.'"
It is, of course, de rigeur for American politicos to make an act of gooey piety. The more sincere, the less gooey, as a general rule. Bush's simple piety is not rocket science ("WWJD?") but sincere. When he expresses it, he earns brickbats as a one-dimensional think who actually believes in heaven! But when Davis regurgitates a line from a Hallmark card, one awaits with bated breath the hoots of the chattering classes and is rewarded with the sound of crickets. This, from the man whose press secretary declared that bishops should stop telling Catholics how to practice their faith after he was rebuked by a gutsy bishop for worshipping the Sacrament of Abortion. I wonder if Carthaginians carried around like cunieform tablets that said, "Nothing will happen to me today that Moloch and I can't handle together."
It is, of course, de rigeur for American politicos to make an act of gooey piety. The more sincere, the less gooey, as a general rule. Bush's simple piety is not rocket science ("WWJD?") but sincere. When he expresses it, he earns brickbats as a one-dimensional think who actually believes in heaven! But when Davis regurgitates a line from a Hallmark card, one awaits with bated breath the hoots of the chattering classes and is rewarded with the sound of crickets. This, from the man whose press secretary declared that bishops should stop telling Catholics how to practice their faith after he was rebuked by a gutsy bishop for worshipping the Sacrament of Abortion. I wonder if Carthaginians carried around like cunieform tablets that said, "Nothing will happen to me today that Moloch and I can't handle together."
The Court Records of Yesterday's "Tribunal In Judgment of the Worthiness of Greg Popcak to Bear the Name 'Christian'" Are Now Available On Line
To briefly recap: Some Inquisitor decided to smear Popcak as an enemy of the Faith because a) he used (gasp!) sexual and nuptial imagery to speak of the Trinity (unheard of to the authors of John, Revelation, and Ephesians) and b) in the course of a long career of teaching chastity and the sanctity of marriage Popcak remarked that he knows some people who let their adolescent kids chart their siblings cycles, but that, of course, others think this is immodest, so make up your own mind since you are the parent and it's your job to decide such matters. Oh, and he was apparently also guilty of the heinous crime of observing that such a practice might help to de-mystify and de-eroticize the biology of sex and help defuse the "If you keep it all hushed up, they'll only want it more" phenomenon which is sometimes at work in the adolescent discovery of sex.
This, apparently, is the extent of Popcak's crimes against the Faith. And for this, a nucleus of embittered malcontents thinks the solution is to defame him. Now some have observed that Popcak is not above criticism. Quite so. And if the Spastic Sphincter Tribunal had written (or defended) a measured response saying, "Popcak, for all his good work, might have considered just not mentioning this rather curious practice" I would have no problem (though I can see nothing intrinsically immoral about it). But let's get real. The purpose of this article was not to suggest that Popcak is a faithful brother in Christ who mentioned a couple of curious ideas in passing. It was to a) practice the art of Catholic Character Assassination and b) as ever, to launch yet another fusillade against JPII, his damn newfangled Theology of the Body, EWTN, Hahn, and all rest of the wicked apostate neo-Catholics.
One of my readers, bless her heart, at least had the good grace to cite the passage in question from Popcak's writing and acknowledge that he was not saying what the Character Assassins for Christ claimed he was saying. But amazingly, other readers were in a snit with me for defending Popcak's good name. Can't a Character Assassin for Christ have *any* fun without judgmental people like me pointing out the thin-lipped phariseeism and lust for condemnation? What a killjoy!
And, of course, a number of people persisted in the false notion that I was arraigning all people who are fond of more conservative expressions of piety as "Lidless Eyes". Allow me to introduce you to my good friends Pete Vere and Shawn McElhinney, two quite "Traditionalist" types whom I am quite happy to call friends. Why? Because they don't go around looking to drum fellow Catholics out of the Church for using the wrong buzzwords and for not having a problem with JPII. They will, like me, *defend* fellow Catholics from self-appointed Inquisitors (a consequence of Just War theory). But they don't feel the peculiar itch to cobble together Character Assassination for Christ campaigns, nor to damn the Pope and all his teachings at every opportunity. If you self-identify as a "traditionalist" but don't share in these sins either, you are not who I am referring to when I speak of Lidless Eye types. If you feel that peculiar itch to hunger and thirst after the condemnation of brother and sister Catholics (or other human beings) on the flimsiest provocation, then perhaps this blog isn't for you.
To briefly recap: Some Inquisitor decided to smear Popcak as an enemy of the Faith because a) he used (gasp!) sexual and nuptial imagery to speak of the Trinity (unheard of to the authors of John, Revelation, and Ephesians) and b) in the course of a long career of teaching chastity and the sanctity of marriage Popcak remarked that he knows some people who let their adolescent kids chart their siblings cycles, but that, of course, others think this is immodest, so make up your own mind since you are the parent and it's your job to decide such matters. Oh, and he was apparently also guilty of the heinous crime of observing that such a practice might help to de-mystify and de-eroticize the biology of sex and help defuse the "If you keep it all hushed up, they'll only want it more" phenomenon which is sometimes at work in the adolescent discovery of sex.
This, apparently, is the extent of Popcak's crimes against the Faith. And for this, a nucleus of embittered malcontents thinks the solution is to defame him. Now some have observed that Popcak is not above criticism. Quite so. And if the Spastic Sphincter Tribunal had written (or defended) a measured response saying, "Popcak, for all his good work, might have considered just not mentioning this rather curious practice" I would have no problem (though I can see nothing intrinsically immoral about it). But let's get real. The purpose of this article was not to suggest that Popcak is a faithful brother in Christ who mentioned a couple of curious ideas in passing. It was to a) practice the art of Catholic Character Assassination and b) as ever, to launch yet another fusillade against JPII, his damn newfangled Theology of the Body, EWTN, Hahn, and all rest of the wicked apostate neo-Catholics.
One of my readers, bless her heart, at least had the good grace to cite the passage in question from Popcak's writing and acknowledge that he was not saying what the Character Assassins for Christ claimed he was saying. But amazingly, other readers were in a snit with me for defending Popcak's good name. Can't a Character Assassin for Christ have *any* fun without judgmental people like me pointing out the thin-lipped phariseeism and lust for condemnation? What a killjoy!
And, of course, a number of people persisted in the false notion that I was arraigning all people who are fond of more conservative expressions of piety as "Lidless Eyes". Allow me to introduce you to my good friends Pete Vere and Shawn McElhinney, two quite "Traditionalist" types whom I am quite happy to call friends. Why? Because they don't go around looking to drum fellow Catholics out of the Church for using the wrong buzzwords and for not having a problem with JPII. They will, like me, *defend* fellow Catholics from self-appointed Inquisitors (a consequence of Just War theory). But they don't feel the peculiar itch to cobble together Character Assassination for Christ campaigns, nor to damn the Pope and all his teachings at every opportunity. If you self-identify as a "traditionalist" but don't share in these sins either, you are not who I am referring to when I speak of Lidless Eye types. If you feel that peculiar itch to hunger and thirst after the condemnation of brother and sister Catholics (or other human beings) on the flimsiest provocation, then perhaps this blog isn't for you.
Wednesday, August 20, 2003
Haloscan Found Wandering the Streets Naked and Drunk
Claims complete memory loss. "I met this guy at a party and he offered to show me his wicked screensaver. Next thing I know I'm here in Times Square babbling about the black helicopters and having visions of biting Patrick Stewart's nose!"
Once the old girl is sober she'll stop having these blackouts for at least a couple of hours.
Claims complete memory loss. "I met this guy at a party and he offered to show me his wicked screensaver. Next thing I know I'm here in Times Square babbling about the black helicopters and having visions of biting Patrick Stewart's nose!"
Once the old girl is sober she'll stop having these blackouts for at least a couple of hours.
A reader says
No. The Blessed Virgin gave that prayer and the Church approved it because God just wants you to pray for no reason. He just likes us to keep busy.
One of the prayers of the Angel at Fatima goes as follows:
My God, I believe, I adore, I hope, and I love you! I beg pardon of You for THOSE WHO DO NOT BELIEVE, DO NOT ADORE, DO NOT HOPE, AND DO NOT LOVE YOU!
CAPITALS emphasis is mine, but if you look at that prayer, and then look back at the Fatima Ejaculation, how can one come to a conclusion OTHER than the fact that we are to pray for the whole world, be they Christian or not, and hope for their salvation?
The more I read, the more I pray, the more convinced I become that Fr. Balthasar was right on the mark.
No. The Blessed Virgin gave that prayer and the Church approved it because God just wants you to pray for no reason. He just likes us to keep busy.
I'm a techno-idiot but...
why don't people a) keep their anti-virus software up to date and b) not open these phony emails?
I've not been infected at all, though I've gotten bails of mail from spoofed addresses.
why don't people a) keep their anti-virus software up to date and b) not open these phony emails?
I've not been infected at all, though I've gotten bails of mail from spoofed addresses.
Attack of the Spastic Sphincter People
Greg Popcak is evil! The Pope is evil! The Theology of the Body is evil! Using nuptial and sexual language to speak of the relationship of God to his people is wrong and icky (even though Jesus, John, Paul, Bernard of Clairvaux and every exegete of the Song of Song who ever lived does it). And if parents were supposed to teach their children about sex and integrate their sexuality into the Tradition, God would not have sent us dirty magazines.
I know Greg. What's more, I know Greg's amazingly healthy family and his two extremely well-adjusted kids (kids who make me wish I'd had their childhood). The cartoon character written about and pontificated on so viciously is not Greg but some weird phantasm of the RadTrad mind. The bitter little people so eager to condemn are living incarnations of why I like the image of the Lidless Eye (though "Spastic Sphincter People" has a certain elan too). Oh and apropos this:
No. That job pretty much falls to the bishops who have given imprimaturs to all his books. Not that that's good enough for the Spastic Sphincter Crowd either, but people who live in self-appointed magisterial glass houses should really not throw stones.
Is there anything these people love? I hope they don't curdle their unfortunate children with their thin-lipped Phariseeism. Of course, having children would involve sex....
Greg Popcak is evil! The Pope is evil! The Theology of the Body is evil! Using nuptial and sexual language to speak of the relationship of God to his people is wrong and icky (even though Jesus, John, Paul, Bernard of Clairvaux and every exegete of the Song of Song who ever lived does it). And if parents were supposed to teach their children about sex and integrate their sexuality into the Tradition, God would not have sent us dirty magazines.
I know Greg. What's more, I know Greg's amazingly healthy family and his two extremely well-adjusted kids (kids who make me wish I'd had their childhood). The cartoon character written about and pontificated on so viciously is not Greg but some weird phantasm of the RadTrad mind. The bitter little people so eager to condemn are living incarnations of why I like the image of the Lidless Eye (though "Spastic Sphincter People" has a certain elan too). Oh and apropos this:
Does Popcak think that the Hahns are bestowed with magisterial authority, the same kind that alone can declare what is anathema?)
No. That job pretty much falls to the bishops who have given imprimaturs to all his books. Not that that's good enough for the Spastic Sphincter Crowd either, but people who live in self-appointed magisterial glass houses should really not throw stones.
Is there anything these people love? I hope they don't curdle their unfortunate children with their thin-lipped Phariseeism. Of course, having children would involve sex....
Janeane Garofalo Tries to be Leftist Ann Coulter, Fails
She's got the shrillness and cheap shots down, but is lacking in various other departments. It'll take more a than a bottle of peroxide to fix the problem. It goes deeper than hair roots.
She's got the shrillness and cheap shots down, but is lacking in various other departments. It'll take more a than a bottle of peroxide to fix the problem. It goes deeper than hair roots.
A conundrum
Periodically I meet Christians who tell me that they believe in Once Saved Always Saved and that if you ask Jesus to be your personal Lord and savior then you can't lose your salvation. They warn me darkly that the Catholic Church is a sinister system of works salvation and so forth.
My response is typically, "Okay. I'll do what you say right now." Then I stop, and pray (with all seriousness) for Jesus to be my personal Lord and savior. It is, after all, what I want. Then I go on my way to Mass. After all, if I can't lose my salvation, then why should it matter if I do?
Periodically I meet Christians who tell me that they believe in Once Saved Always Saved and that if you ask Jesus to be your personal Lord and savior then you can't lose your salvation. They warn me darkly that the Catholic Church is a sinister system of works salvation and so forth.
My response is typically, "Okay. I'll do what you say right now." Then I stop, and pray (with all seriousness) for Jesus to be my personal Lord and savior. It is, after all, what I want. Then I go on my way to Mass. After all, if I can't lose my salvation, then why should it matter if I do?
Canada: Where You Can Learn a Lot of Junk at Taxpayer Expense
A reader sends along the following:
This is pretty standard fare for "alternative schools". The University of Washington has similar junk in their Continuing Education school. I get the impression anybody with a private hobby can come in and teach a class on pretty much anything if people are willing to sign up for it.
A reader sends along the following:
North Shore Continuing Education & Extension Services is a community service operated on a cost recovery basis by the North Vancouver School District and in cooperation with other agencies on the North Shore." The key words here are "North Vancouver School District" which is a government sponsored body.
This august body offers education in their "Reality Series" such gems such as "Varieties Of Psychic Experience", "Technology of Spirit", and "Our Interaction With Planet Earth".
And here we find after "Basic Astronomy" this gem - "Past Life Regression". It is interesting to note that the "Past Life Regression" is offered by one "M Judd", while one of executives on the controlling committee is one Jane Judd. Wonder if this is a coincidence?
Here we find, among others, "Foot Reflexology", "Hand Reflexology", "Hatha Yoga" (multiple levels) and "Sacred Yoga". Then you can rebalance your body's energy in Therapeutic Touch.
So Mark, what do you think my chances are of introducing my latest courses for study on "Where Homosexual Sex Is Banned By The Bible", or "Mother Teresa's Pro Life Quotes"?
This is pretty standard fare for "alternative schools". The University of Washington has similar junk in their Continuing Education school. I get the impression anybody with a private hobby can come in and teach a class on pretty much anything if people are willing to sign up for it.
Cultured Despisers Without a Clue
Seems to be the week to attack Bush's faith. The Wieseltier piece is pretty stupid (Summary: "Bush believes in heaven. Can you imagine? What an unsophisticated maroon!"). But the real prizewinner is the GQ morph of Bush into the Sacred Heart. The sheer tonedeafness of this is hilarious to anybody with a theological knowledge that made it out of kindergarten. It's like chattering class beauxeaux who speak of the Pope giving "fire and brimstone" sermons or the Intellects Suited Only for Writing Headlines who caption photos of nuns saying the Rosary at abortion clinics "Fundamentalists Protest Abortion". These are people who don't seem to be capable of recognizing the slightest elementary realities about religion.
Bush's relatively simple faith (and in his case, I mean that as a compliment) is a simple Protestant faith. (To not know that is to show who is the real simpleton.) Bush is simple, I say, but not necessary simplistic since (I will say this again) Bush's enemies underestimate his intelligence to their ongoing frustration since he is not stupid. He wields the same great advantage Reagan did: his enemies are blinded by pride into believing their own propaganda. It's an advantage we Christians have too, since puny minds like Nicholas Kristoff can actually survey a tradition that gave birth to intellects like Thomas Aquinas, Edith Stein, and JPII and conclude, "They believe in the Virgin Birth. They're stupid." We Christians must continue to humor people with the intellectual rigor of Maureen Dowd as we busy ourselves subverting the dominant paradigm. They'll never know what hit them.
Seems to be the week to attack Bush's faith. The Wieseltier piece is pretty stupid (Summary: "Bush believes in heaven. Can you imagine? What an unsophisticated maroon!"). But the real prizewinner is the GQ morph of Bush into the Sacred Heart. The sheer tonedeafness of this is hilarious to anybody with a theological knowledge that made it out of kindergarten. It's like chattering class beauxeaux who speak of the Pope giving "fire and brimstone" sermons or the Intellects Suited Only for Writing Headlines who caption photos of nuns saying the Rosary at abortion clinics "Fundamentalists Protest Abortion". These are people who don't seem to be capable of recognizing the slightest elementary realities about religion.
Bush's relatively simple faith (and in his case, I mean that as a compliment) is a simple Protestant faith. (To not know that is to show who is the real simpleton.) Bush is simple, I say, but not necessary simplistic since (I will say this again) Bush's enemies underestimate his intelligence to their ongoing frustration since he is not stupid. He wields the same great advantage Reagan did: his enemies are blinded by pride into believing their own propaganda. It's an advantage we Christians have too, since puny minds like Nicholas Kristoff can actually survey a tradition that gave birth to intellects like Thomas Aquinas, Edith Stein, and JPII and conclude, "They believe in the Virgin Birth. They're stupid." We Christians must continue to humor people with the intellectual rigor of Maureen Dowd as we busy ourselves subverting the dominant paradigm. They'll never know what hit them.