The AntiSophist

Senators, Don't fund Abortion in Health Care

2009-11-20T10:10:00.000-08:00

This letter is an edited form of a previous one I wrote to a different audience. I sent it to both my Senators. Please contact your senators also. We must stop abortion from being funded in the socialized "healthcare" plans being pushed by the liberals at the bidding of the communist President of the United States of America.

Madam Senator,

For the last 15 years as a professional firefighter, I have been privileged to belong to a labor union. In that time, I have served in various capacities including my current position as Vice President. I believe this membership in a labor union is a privilege for several reasons; early in my career I benefitted from my Local leadership’s dedication to ensuring that all represented employees are treated with justice. Also, my membership has afforded me the opportunity to express to those with opposing viewpoints and opinions the moral and philosophical justification of the labor movement in regards to workers rights, and its’ contribution to a just society.
I realize that for some, membership in a union is simply a necessity of employment with the only requirement being the payment of monthly dues. For others, it’s no different than membership in some social fraternal organization (e.g. the “Elks”, “Eagles”, or “American Legion”). For many it is seen as an opportunity to have a voice in the workplace and in local, state, and national political discourse. For me it’s all of those things, and something much more. Before I explain, let me ask:
Do you support the labor movement? Do you promote the cause of workers receiving a livable wage? Do you believe that the hours of work required of laborers should be limited by contract rules and statutes that include mandatory overtime pay? Should employers be responsible for providing a workplace free of unnecessary health risks and disparity in the treatment of workers based on their race, creed, skin color, gender, or religious affiliation?
Are your answers to those questions simply your opinion? Is there no right or wrong answer? Is your “yes” simply because supporting and promoting those causes puts money into your pocket, improves your economic and social condition, or keeps you in office? Does it come down to the simple idea of “Might makes Right” born of the 18th century “Will to Power” philosophers that inspired Marxism and National Socialism? Does being in power make you right and establish or prove the truth of those positions regarding worker’s or anyone else’s rights? Is there no right or wrong but only the powerful and the powerless?
I think not. I believe that the cause for worker’s rights is worthy of being supported because they are based on an objective moral truth. That is; all people have the right to be treated with dignity, respect, and justice by the simple fact that they are human persons. Collectively; worker’s rights, minority rights, religious rights, freedom of speech, freedom of self determination… are basic human rights issues. Those who are powerless are still entitled to those rights (such as the people in Darfur) and when deprived of them, it is recognized as a human rights violation.
To deprive someone of these rights is an injustice. All injustices are wrong. However, some injustices have more grave consequence for the victim than others do. Therefore it can be said that all injustices are equally wrong, but all wrongs are not equally unjust. For Example; it is rightly recognized by our judicial system that stealing a pack of gum is an injustice and is therefore against the law (a misdemeanor). Embezzling someone’s pension is also stealing, but is a worse injustice and therefore the consequences of breaking that law are greater (a felony with prison time).
As you readily see, the more grave the consequence of a wrong, the worse the injustice that has been committed. The Founding Father’s of our country rightly recognized that we have "...certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness...” arranged in that order out of right reason not coincidence. To pursue happiness you must be free, to be free you must first be alive! To be alive is the foundation of all these rights because we're talking about a human person who is alive.
To work for the protection of people’s rights in regards to workers justice is good. But, it is only good as long as you are not denying them a superior right. You can't promote a grave injustice while protecting a hierarchically inferior issue of social justice. To do so opposes the integration of human rights into our society, thus disintegrating human rights.
The protection of innocent human life, from conception to natural death, must be promoted by elected officials, organized labor, and all interested in a civil society. This encompasses the issues of abortion, destructive embryonic stem cell research, human cloning, and euthanasia (“death with dignity”). To promote other human rights issues at the expense of, or while simultaneously attacking a hierarchically superior right, (specifically the right to life upon which all other human rights are contingent), is an abomination of justice.

Every day approximately 3,200 (ref. CDC 2008 statistics) unborn infants lives’ are ended through procured abortions in the United States. It is the single most important human rights issue of our time, and I daresay, of all time. We must protect and promote the rights of workers to fair wages, reasonable hours, and healthy working conditions. Just not at the expense of innocent people’s lives.

Voting for a healthcare bill that supports this human rights violation is not warranted. Especially by a Senator who professes to support worker’s rights. Please act in concert with your professed morals and do not support any healthcare bill which funds abortion.

President Obama Infanticide/Eugenics/Euthanasia Tracker

2009-04-27T06:31:00.000-07:00

January 22, 2009: Affirmed his dedication to "reproductive freedom" in a speech commemorating the anniversary of the Roe ~Vs~ Wade decision.
January 23, 2009: Nullified the Mexico City Policy, freeing up federal tax dollars for worldwide organizations that provide abortion services in order to promote "family planning".
February 27, 2009: President Obama announces that the health care workers "Conscience Clause" put in place in the previous administration would be reviewed and probably changed because it could impinge on a womans right to receive medical care (have her baby killed).
Marcy 9, 2009: rescinds ban on embryonic stem cell research
March 18, 2009: Though the economy is in turmoil, Obama sends $50,000,000 to the United Nations Population Fund. An organization that violates human rights through supporting coerced and forced sterilizations and abortions in China.
Appointments reflect a contempt for protecting innocent lives, e.g.
· Rahm Emmanual: Chief of Staff (100% pro-abortion record as a congressman)
· Melody Barnes : Domestic Policy Adviser (former board member of Planned Parenthood Action Fund)
· Ellen Moran: Communications Director (former executive director of pro-abortion PAC Emily’s List)
· Hillary Clinton: Secretary of State (long record of extreme pro-abortion activity as First Lady, NY Senator)
· Kathleen Sebelius: Health & Human Services Secretary (extreme pro-abortion record [but still a “good Catholic”])
· More to come…
FOCA Obama: on July 17, 2007, Obama said, "The first thing I'd do as president is sign the Freedom of Choice Act. That's the first thing that I'd do." FOCA Bill about to be reintroduced in both houses at Obama's urging (early 2009).

United Christian Foundation Not Even Christian

2008-09-24T06:00:00.000-07:00

I was reading a news story regarding a chaplain (Kent Higgins) at the University of Massachusettes who was advising students of a way to get credits by campaigning for Obama. The story itself doesn't really surprise me. Universities are crawling with liberals. In my experience, liberals are tyrannical in their intolerance of competing social and political philosophy. What I did find interesting was a comment posted by one of the readers.

"I am suspect of a Chaplain that supports Obama. I would be curious to find out what denomination he belongs to considering the Junior Senator from Illinois record on infanticide. I am making a huge assumption that this Chaplain is even Christian, we are talking about the University of Massachusetts." - "Jim"

Here are some points I'd like to make.

1. "I am suspect..." Me to. Not because he's a chaplain though. I'm suspect of anyone who supports Obama.

2. "I would be curious..." Me too. I put about 3 minutes of effort into it and this is what I found

3. "I am making a huge assumption that this chaplain is even Christian..." This is what I find most interesting. It is a very "Evangelical Christian" type of statement. Here is what I mean:

When I was sojourning through various traditions of Protestant Christianity, I often found an ironic accusation against the Catholic Church. This accusation was that Catholicism was very controlling and judgemental. One of the things that was complained about most vehemently was how the Catholic Church identified herself as the one true Church founded by Jesus Christ and that all other Christian churches or communities were in varying degrees of error in their teaching and faith. This would be followed by an explanation of how their particular community embraced the real truth, and that the Catholic Church (and other Christian churches to a lesser degree) were in error regarding their teaching and faith.

The problem they had with the Church was more about the Church's "arrogance" than it was about the Church's teaching (though there were difficulties with Catholic teaching also). I mean, "how dare the Catholic Church actually believe what it professes and act in a manner congruent with that teaching".

Back to "Jim's" comment... I assume that he is from an "Evangelical" church and that he would describe himself as "Born Again". I also assume that he believes that the Bible is the innerent, inspired word of God and that it alone is authoritative in matters of Faith. I also assume that he believes in "Eternal Security" for those true believers who have been Born Again. That's a lot of assuming, and you know what they say about assuming...

One of the problems with Evangelical Christianity is their understanding of sin and their understanding of being saved by "Faith Alone" and how this relates to their definition of being "Christian". This leads to an inability to recognize social problems for what they are (sins). And it leads to a false judgement of the state of another person's soul.

To believe that a person can only be a true Christian if they "behave" in a certain way is a common error of judgement for Evangelicals. They are close to the truth though. Behaving is about putting your faith into action, you know, WORKS!! (read the Jame's letter). The reason for the judgement that the person couldn't be a real Christian is becuase of the "once saved always saved" error. Many an Evangelical has told me that if a person is "truly" saved they won't be attracted to do the sinful things any longer. And if a person who thinks they are "really" saved falls into some great sin, then they weren't really saved in the first place. You see, many Evangelicals want it both ways... and that just doesn't work (i.e. "eternal security" and the idea that a person couldn't have really been saved in the first place "it didn't take" if they behave in a gravely sinful manner).

I believe that the chaplain in question can be a sincere Christian in his heart and be in error in how he acts in social, political, and interpersonal matters. I would just say that he has a poorly formed conscience to be able to justify supporting a candidate that promotes the culture of death.

I would encourage any Evangelicals reading this to take some time and study the Catholic teaching on justification. Do it with a prayerful and open mind. It makes much more sense than the Protestant/Evangelical position(s) and teaching(s). Here are some resources:

Born again?
Eternal Security (Once Saved Always Saved)?
Grace and Justification
Mortal Sin?
Necessity of Baptism
Reward and Merit
Salvation Outside the Church?

Christian Voter Part 4: Euthanasia

2008-09-20T07:03:00.000-07:00

"Respecting Life at the End of Life"
Washington State Catholic Bishops Oppose I-1000
That Legalizes Physician-assisted Suicide

A well-financed initiative campaign is currently seeking to legalize physician-assisted suicide in Washington State. Proponents of the measure (Initiative 1000) maintain that individuals in the final stages of a terminal illness should have the choice to end their lives on their own terms. This assertion is contrary to our Catholic teaching. We believe that God alone has sovereignty over life, and that human beings are not simply autonomous individuals, but a family called into communion with God and each other.

Based on Sacred Scripture and tradition, the Catholic Church teaches that all life is a gift from the Creator. As God’s creation, the value and dignity of human life cannot be limited by the boundaries of our earthly existence. We therefore embrace the hope that the fullness of life consists not in the number of our days, but in sharing the very life of God. This sacred reality calls us to be grateful stewards of life from its beginning to its natural end.

Initiative 1000 contradicts this understanding and represents a dangerous new assault on the culture of life. Of special concern is the threat that legalizing assisted suicide poses for vulnerable persons, who are already at risk of marginalization by an individualistic and utilitarian perspective of life. Those most at risk from this dangerous change in public policy are elderly persons, those without adequate health care, people with disabilities and those with no family support system.

Further, by turning suicide into a medical option that can be exercised without consulting family or friends, it radically alters the relationship between physicians and their terminally-ill patients, depriving patients of the vital support their family, friends and faith can provide in making good decisions at the end of life. It may also put the decision for life and death into the hands of insurance companies, which may be motivated only by financial gain and not the best interest of the patient.

Through the compassionate care of hospice services, we have learned that people faced with their own mortality have a deep desire to embrace what they value most. They want a final opportunity to grant and seek forgiveness, to offer thanks, to demonstrate love and to say good-bye. Assisted suicide denies dying persons the one possession necessary to fulfill these desires: time.

All Catholics have a duty to bring their faith and values into the public square in order to build a just society. Because God alone has sovereignty over the sacred gift of life, we uphold the dignity of all human life regardless of frailty or social definitions of usefulness. As the bishops of Washington State, we oppose Initiative 1000 and ask all Catholics before voting on this measure to inform their consciences about the Church’s teaching on end of life decisions.

As stewards of life, individuals and society have a responsibility to promote compassion and care for people suffering from terminal illnesses, always striving to give them hope and to alleviate their fear, pain and loneliness. Our participation as faithful citizens responsible for establishing and maintaining laws that respect life must always seek the common good and protect vulnerable people, including those confronting death, by ensuring that their final days are lived as fully as possible in the company of family and friends.

Initiative 1000 stands in stark opposition to our teaching, and we urge all Catholic people to commit themselves to study and prayer in order to better understand Catholic teaching on end-of-life issues, and to explain the dangers of Initiative 1000 to family members, friends and neighbors.

For more information to assist you in better understanding this important issue, visit the Washington State Catholic Conference website at www.thewscc.org or call (206) 301-0556.

Of particular concern to me is the Insurance Company aspect of this. Insurance companies are in the business of making money. I'm sure everyone has experienced difficulty in getting a claim paid without first receiving several denials. Or even a final decision from your insurance carrier to not cover something. When my wife and I were young, (WOW!! that pains me to say) and were first starting our family, our insurance wouldn't pay for "Well Baby Checks", but they would pay for my or my wifes surgical sterilization, they would pay for contraceptive prescriptions, they would even pay for an abortion, but I'll be damned if they would pay for us to take our child to a physician for preventative care. How would the decision be made by the insurance company when faced with either paying for expensive cancer treatment in an individual with a poor prognosis or paying a paltry sum for the person to "die with dignity"?

I am a firm believer that the results of this initiative passing would be deadly for the poor and middle class.

Arbiter of Justice addendum

2008-09-18T08:38:00.000-07:00

So I was at my men's group on Tuesday. We are currently reading and discussing Pope Benedict's Encylical, Spe Salvi. It has been very enriching to say the least. On this particular evening we read the following paragraphs (see below). I found it very interesting that our reading of these paragraphs happened to coincide with my blog discussion on Justice. The Pope's insight is something I would like to share as an addendum to my "Aribiter of Justice" post.

III. Judgement as a setting for learning and practising hope

41. At the conclusion of the central section of the Church's great Credo—the part that recounts the mystery of Christ, from his eternal birth of the Father and his temporal birth of the Virgin Mary, through his Cross and Resurrection to the second coming—we find the phrase: “he will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead”. From the earliest times, the prospect of the Judgement has influenced Christians in their daily living as a criterion by which to order their present life, as a summons to their conscience, and at the same time as hope in God's justice. Faith in Christ has never looked merely backwards or merely upwards, but always also forwards to the hour of justice that the Lord repeatedly proclaimed. This looking ahead has given Christianity its importance for the present moment. In the arrangement of Christian sacred buildings, which were intended to make visible the historic and cosmic breadth of faith in Christ, it became customary to depict the Lord returning as a king—the symbol of hope—at the east end; while the west wall normally portrayed the Last Judgement as a symbol of our responsibility for our lives—a scene which followed and accompanied the faithful as they went out to resume their daily routine. As the iconography of the Last Judgement developed, however, more and more prominence was given to its ominous and frightening aspects, which obviously held more fascination for artists than the splendour of hope, often all too well concealed beneath the horrors.

42. In the modern era, the idea of the Last Judgement has faded into the background: Christian faith has been individualized and primarily oriented towards the salvation of the believer's own soul, while reflection on world history is largely dominated by the idea of progress. The fundamental content of awaiting a final Judgement, however, has not disappeared: it has simply taken on a totally different form. The atheism of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries is—in its origins and aims—a type of moralism: a protest against the injustices of the world and of world history. A world marked by so much injustice, innocent suffering, and cynicism of power cannot be the work of a good God. A God with responsibility for such a world would not be a just God, much less a good God. It is for the sake of morality that this God has to be contested. Since there is no God to create justice, it seems man himself is now called to establish justice. If in the face of this world's suffering, protest against God is understandable, the claim that humanity can and must do what no God actually does or is able to do is both presumptuous and intrinsically false. It is no accident that this idea has led to the greatest forms of cruelty and violations of justice; rather, it is grounded in the intrinsic falsity of the claim. A world which has to create its own justice is a world without hope. No one and nothing can answer for centuries of suffering. No one and nothing can guarantee that the cynicism of power—whatever beguiling ideological mask it adopts—will cease to dominate the world. This is why the great thinkers of the Frankfurt School, Max Horkheimer and Theodor W. Adorno, were equally critical of atheism and theism. Horkheimer radically excluded the possibility of ever finding a this-worldly substitute for God, while at the same time he rejected the image of a good and just God. In an extreme radicalization of the Old Testament prohibition of images, he speaks of a “longing for the totally Other” that remains inaccessible—a cry of yearning directed at world history. Adorno also firmly upheld this total rejection of images, which naturally meant the exclusion of any “image” of a loving God. On the other hand, he also constantly emphasized this “negative” dialectic and asserted that justice —true justice—would require a world “where not only present suffering would be wiped out, but also that which is irrevocably past would be undone”[30]. This, would mean, however—to express it with positive and hence, for him, inadequate symbols—that there can be no justice without a resurrection of the dead. Yet this would have to involve “the resurrection of the flesh, something that is totally foreign to idealism and the realm of Absolute spirit”[31].

43. Christians likewise can and must constantly learn from the strict rejection of images that is contained in God's first commandment (cf. Ex 20:4). The truth of negative theology was highlighted by the Fourth Lateran Council, which explicitly stated that however great the similarity that may be established between Creator and creature, the dissimilarity between them is always greater[32]. In any case, for the believer the rejection of images cannot be carried so far that one ends up, as Horkheimer and Adorno would like, by saying “no” to both theses—theism and atheism. God has given himself an “image”: in Christ who was made man. In him who was crucified, the denial of false images of God is taken to an extreme. God now reveals his true face in the figure of the sufferer who shares man's God-forsaken condition by taking it upon himself. This innocent sufferer has attained the certitude of hope: there is a God, and God can create justice in a way that we cannot conceive, yet we can begin to grasp it through faith. Yes, there is a resurrection of the flesh[33]. There is justice[34]. There is an “undoing” of past suffering, a reparation that sets things aright. For this reason, faith in the Last Judgement is first and foremost hope—the need for which was made abundantly clear in the upheavals of recent centuries. I am convinced that the question of justice constitutes the essential argument, or in any case the strongest argument, in favour of faith in eternal life. The purely individual need for a fulfilment that is denied to us in this life, for an everlasting love that we await, is certainly an important motive for believing that man was made for eternity; but only in connection with the impossibility that the injustice of history should be the final word does the necessity for Christ's return and for new life become fully convincing.

44. To protest against God in the name of justice is not helpful. A world without God is a world without hope (cf. Eph 2:12). Only God can create justice. And faith gives us the certainty that he does so. The image of the Last Judgement is not primarily an image of terror, but an image of hope; for us it may even be the decisive image of hope. Is it not also a frightening image? I would say: it is an image that evokes responsibility, an image, therefore, of that fear of which Saint Hilary spoke when he said that all our fear has its place in love[35]. God is justice and creates justice. This is our consolation and our hope. And in his justice there is also grace. This we know by turning our gaze to the crucified and risen Christ. Both these things—justice and grace—must be seen in their correct inner relationship. Grace does not cancel out justice. It does not make wrong into right. It is not a sponge which wipes everything away, so that whatever someone has done on earth ends up being of equal value. Dostoevsky, for example, was right to protest against this kind of Heaven and this kind of grace in his novel The Brothers Karamazov. Evildoers, in the end, do not sit at table at the eternal banquet beside their victims without distinction, as though nothing had happened. Here I would like to quote a passage from Plato which expresses a premonition of just judgement that in many respects remains true and salutary for Christians too. Albeit using mythological images, he expresses the truth with an unambiguous clarity, saying that in the end souls will stand naked before the judge. It no longer matters what they once were in history, but only what they are in truth: “Often, when it is the king or some other monarch or potentate that he (the judge) has to deal with, he finds that there is no soundness in the soul whatever; he finds it scourged and scarred by the various acts of perjury and wrong-doing ...; it is twisted and warped by lies and vanity, and nothing is straight because truth has had no part in its development. Power, luxury, pride, and debauchery have left it so full of disproportion and ugliness that when he has inspected it (he) sends it straight to prison, where on its arrival it will undergo the appropriate punishment ... Sometimes, though, the eye of the judge lights on a different soul which has lived in purity and truth ... then he is struck with admiration and sends him to the isles of the blessed”[36]. In the parable of the rich man and Lazarus (cf. Lk 16:19-31), Jesus admonishes us through the image of a soul destroyed by arrogance and opulence, who has created an impassable chasm between himself and the poor man; the chasm of being trapped within material pleasures; the chasm of forgetting the other, of incapacity to love, which then becomes a burning and unquenchable thirst. We must note that in this parable Jesus is not referring to the final destiny after the Last Judgement, but is taking up a notion found, inter alia, in early Judaism, namely that of an intermediate state between death and resurrection, a state in which the final sentence is yet to be pronounced.

45. This early Jewish idea of an intermediate state includes the view that these souls are not simply in a sort of temporary custody but, as the parable of the rich man illustrates, are already being punished or are experiencing a provisional form of bliss. There is also the idea that this state can involve purification and healing which mature the soul for communion with God. The early Church took up these concepts, and in the Western Church they gradually developed into the doctrine of Purgatory. We do not need to examine here the complex historical paths of this development; it is enough to ask what it actually means. With death, our life-choice becomes definitive—our life stands before the judge. Our choice, which in the course of an entire life takes on a certain shape, can have a variety of forms. There can be people who have totally destroyed their desire for truth and readiness to love, people for whom everything has become a lie, people who have lived for hatred and have suppressed all love within themselves. This is a terrifying thought, but alarming profiles of this type can be seen in certain figures of our own history. In such people all would be beyond remedy and the destruction of good would be irrevocable: this is what we mean by the word Hell[37]. On the other hand there can be people who are utterly pure, completely permeated by God, and thus fully open to their neighbours—people for whom communion with God even now gives direction to their entire being and whose journey towards God only brings to fulfilment what they already are[38].

46. Yet we know from experience that neither case is normal in human life. For the great majority of people—we may suppose—there remains in the depths of their being an ultimate interior openness to truth, to love, to God. In the concrete choices of life, however, it is covered over by ever new compromises with evil—much filth covers purity, but the thirst for purity remains and it still constantly re-emerges from all that is base and remains present in the soul. What happens to such individuals when they appear before the Judge? Will all the impurity they have amassed through life suddenly cease to matter? What else might occur? Saint Paul, in his First Letter to the Corinthians, gives us an idea of the differing impact of God's judgement according to each person's particular circumstances. He does this using images which in some way try to express the invisible, without it being possible for us to conceptualize these images—simply because we can neither see into the world beyond death nor do we have any experience of it. Paul begins by saying that Christian life is built upon a common foundation: Jesus Christ. This foundation endures. If we have stood firm on this foundation and built our life upon it, we know that it cannot be taken away from us even in death. Then Paul continues: “Now if any one builds on the foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw—each man's work will become manifest; for the Day will disclose it, because it will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test what sort of work each one has done. If the work which any man has built on the foundation survives, he will receive a reward. If any man's work is burned up, he will suffer loss, though he himself will be saved, but only as through fire” (1 Cor 3:12-15). In this text, it is in any case evident that our salvation can take different forms, that some of what is built may be burned down, that in order to be saved we personally have to pass through “fire” so as to become fully open to receiving God and able to take our place at the table of the eternal marriage-feast.

47. Some recent theologians are of the opinion that the fire which both burns and saves is Christ himself, the Judge and Saviour. The encounter with him is the decisive act of judgement. Before his gaze all falsehood melts away. This encounter with him, as it burns us, transforms and frees us, allowing us to become truly ourselves. All that we build during our lives can prove to be mere straw, pure bluster, and it collapses. Yet in the pain of this encounter, when the impurity and sickness of our lives become evident to us, there lies salvation. His gaze, the touch of his heart heals us through an undeniably painful transformation “as through fire”. But it is a blessed pain, in which the holy power of his love sears through us like a flame, enabling us to become totally ourselves and thus totally of God. In this way the inter-relation between justice and grace also becomes clear: the way we live our lives is not immaterial, but our defilement does not stain us for ever if we have at least continued to reach out towards Christ, towards truth and towards love. Indeed, it has already been burned away through Christ's Passion. At the moment of judgement we experience and we absorb the overwhelming power of his love over all the evil in the world and in ourselves. The pain of love becomes our salvation and our joy. It is clear that we cannot calculate the “duration” of this transforming burning in terms of the chronological measurements of this world. The transforming “moment” of this encounter eludes earthly time-reckoning—it is the heart's time, it is the time of “passage” to communion with God in the Body of Christ[39]. The judgement of God is hope, both because it is justice and because it is grace. If it were merely grace, making all earthly things cease to matter, God would still owe us an answer to the question about justice—the crucial question that we ask of history and of God. If it were merely justice, in the end it could bring only fear to us all. The incarnation of God in Christ has so closely linked the two together—judgement and grace—that justice is firmly established: we all work out our salvation “with fear and trembling” (Phil 2:12). Nevertheless grace allows us all to hope, and to go trustfully to meet the Judge whom we know as our “advocate”, or parakletos (cf. 1 Jn 2:1).

48. A further point must be mentioned here, because it is important for the practice of Christian hope. Early Jewish thought includes the idea that one can help the deceased in their intermediate state through prayer (see for example 2 Macc 12:38-45; first century BC). The equivalent practice was readily adopted by Christians and is common to the Eastern and Western Church. The East does not recognize the purifying and expiatory suffering of souls in the afterlife, but it does acknowledge various levels of beatitude and of suffering in the intermediate state. The souls of the departed can, however, receive “solace and refreshment” through the Eucharist, prayer and almsgiving. The belief that love can reach into the afterlife, that reciprocal giving and receiving is possible, in which our affection for one another continues beyond the limits of death—this has been a fundamental conviction of Christianity throughout the ages and it remains a source of comfort today. Who would not feel the need to convey to their departed loved ones a sign of kindness, a gesture of gratitude or even a request for pardon? Now a further question arises: if “Purgatory” is simply purification through fire in the encounter with the Lord, Judge and Saviour, how can a third person intervene, even if he or she is particularly close to the other? When we ask such a question, we should recall that no man is an island, entire of itself. Our lives are involved with one another, through innumerable interactions they are linked together. No one lives alone. No one sins alone. No one is saved alone. The lives of others continually spill over into mine: in what I think, say, do and achieve. And conversely, my life spills over into that of others: for better and for worse. So my prayer for another is not something extraneous to that person, something external, not even after death. In the interconnectedness of Being, my gratitude to the other—my prayer for him—can play a small part in his purification. And for that there is no need to convert earthly time into God's time: in the communion of souls simple terrestrial time is superseded. It is never too late to touch the heart of another, nor is it ever in vain. In this way we further clarify an important element of the Christian concept of hope. Our hope is always essentially also hope for others; only thus is it truly hope for me too[40]. As Christians we should never limit ourselves to asking: how can I save myself? We should also ask: what can I do in order that others may be saved and that for them too the star of hope may rise? Then I will have done my utmost for my own personal salvation as well.

[30] Negative Dialektik (1966), Third part, III, 11, in Gesammelte Schriften VI, Frankfurt am Main 1973, p.395.
[31] Ibid., Second part, p.207.
[32] DS 806.
[33] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, 988-1004.
[34] Cf. ibid., 1040.
[35] Cf. Tractatus super Psalmos, Ps 127, 1-3: CSEL 22, 628-630.
[36] Gorgias 525a-526c.
[37] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1033-1037.
[38] Cf. ibid., 1023-1029.
[39] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1030-1032.
[40] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church , 1032.

Arbiter of Justice

2008-09-15T16:37:00.000-07:00

Here I will attempt to answer some questions that came up in one of the combox's from the "Questions for Members of Labor Unions on Abortion" post. I believe that an entire book could probably (and has already been I'm sure) be written on the subject.

Here are the questions: (Thanks Vero Possumus)
1. "What is "justice"? Who is the arbiter of what constitutes "justice".
2. "In human affairs, who is the arbiter of what constitutes justice?"

First some definitions- (mine unless noted otherwise)
Justice- when you get what you deserve
Arbiter- One who has the power to judge or decide (American Heritage®: 4th Ed.)

Q1. Who is the arbiter of what constitutes justice?

I will rephrase the questions to better explain in what manner I understand what is being asked. Who established/decided what is right and wrong, and who decides/interprets what is fair and equitable in human affairs? To a certain degree that query begs the question, ("is there an absolute right and wrong?"), to which my answer is a resounding yes. To keep from getting sidetracked though, I will just leave that assumptive truth as the fact upon which to base the answers to the two aforementioned questions.

The existence of an absolute right and wrong, as opposed to relativism, necessarily leads one to the admission of an absolute Deity. If all truth is relative then there would exist more than one truth. In either or propositions there is no room for a “both and”. Moral relativists can and do argue otherwise, but then they are defeated by their own argument. If they’re right, then I’m also right. Or at least they can’t tell me I’m wrong. If they tell me I’m wrong, then they lose their argument.

So an absolute Deity exists. In this belief I would describe myself as Thomistic. Without getting too in depth as to what that means, suffice it to say that I am Trinitarian. I believe that the second person of the Triune God became incarnate of Mary who remained ever virgin, just as Martin Luther taught and believed. The second person of the Trinity is Jesus who is Christ. As a follower of Christ and as a believer in His “Good News”, I am a Christian.

So the answer to question 1 is: God; Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

The real difficulty isn’t so much found in question #1 however; it’s found in question #2. Because it’s one thing to know that there is a correct answer available. It’s another thing entirely to know who, amongst the voices clamoring for attention, knows the answer. Bottom line, it’s a question of authority. There are two distinct parts to the answer. Distinct yet united in that they are both disposed toward an orderly society.

Q2. In human affairs, who is the arbiter of what constitutes justice?
First the rephrase of the question: Who decides/interprets what is fair and equitable in human affairs?

Answer part 1- The prudential civil authority decides this. But depending on what that authority understands and administers as true justice, what they decide as being fair and equitable may or may not be just.

Let’s use the United States as an example: We have the Constitution as the highest authority of justice in our society. It is here in the Constitution where what is fair and equitable is defined. But that isn’t enough. If everybody was empowered to private interpretation of the Constitution there would be chaos. The Founding Fathers, in their wisdom, recognized this. So, built in to the Constitution was the mechanism for giving life to the document. Thus two branches of government protect and build upon these laws. A third branch judges the protective actions and tertiary laws enacted by the other two branches against the written word of the Constitution and the tradition of how it has been followed.

Answer part2- Since what a civil authority decides on as being fair and equitable may be inconsistent with what God has actually decided is fair and equitable we must look further into the question.

God had established what is right and wrong. Throughout time God has revealed His truth to us in both oral (tradition) and written form. God has also embedded the truth on our hearts. There are things, without being revealed through oral or written means, that every person can know, (e.g. taking another person's property against their will is wrong). God, also in his wisdom, recognized that every individual can’t be empowered to authoritatively determine what divine truth is. Especially when that determination of right and wrong binds other people.

Throughout history, God has given certain individuals/groups the power to govern his people and authoritatively interpret matters of faith and morals (Justice). In the fullness of time God revealed Himself to man in the person of Christ Jesus. Now Jesus shook things up pretty good.
1- He gathered about him twelve followers and gave them authority over people. (Matt 18:18)
2- Of the twelve followers, Simon Bar Jonah was given special authority and had his name changed by Jesus to reflect this (Cephas). (Matt 16:19)
3- These twelve had successors who wield their authority in perpetuity.
4- For the last 2,000 or so years this line of succession has continued.
5- Some have attempted to appropriate this authority through leaving the community and the obligation for obedience to its proper authority.

In the end, there is only one actual authority on Earth for interpreting equity and justice according to God’s revelation and investment of responsibility. All other interpretations are true only in as much as they measure up to what God has established in the Catholic Church.

So the short answer would be: The Magisterium of the Catholic Church headed by the Pope.

Definition of Sophist

2008-09-15T05:38:00.000-07:00

I see that a number of my visitors are searching for the definition of "antisophist" on the various search engines and that is what brings them to my blog. Very flattering, it's like finding a picture of yourself in the dictionary under the word "geek".

Just so those readers won't ultimately be disapointed, here is the definition of "Sophist". The definition to which my blog is supposed to be "Anti" is 1b, and 2.

Sophist

soph·ist
–noun

1.
a. any of a class of professional teachers in ancient Greece who gave instruction in various fields, as in general culture, rhetoric, politics, or disputation.

b. a person belonging to this class at a later period who, while professing to teach skill in reasoning, concerned himself with ingenuity and specious effectiveness rather than soundness of argument.

2. a person who reasons adroitly and speciously rather than soundly.

3. a philosopher.

Sarah Palin Feeding Frenzy on Saturday Night Live

2008-09-14T08:04:00.000-07:00

So I stayed up late to watch Saturday Night Live, you know... that NBC show that used to be funny (late 90's to about 2001). I watched because Olympic champion Michael Phelps was going to be the host.

The show started with a skit of Sarah Palin (Tina Fey), & Hillary Clinton (Amy Poehler) having a discussion about the current state of politics and the 2008 presidential race.

For some Reason I can't embed the video so click here to watch it. The most humerous part of the video for me was at the beginning when it was introduced as "A Non Partisan Message From Governor Sarah Palin & Senator Hillary Clinton". I admit that Tina Fey did a pretty good job with the Palin impersonation from a technical perspective. There were some real zingers, and the live studio audience (filled with friends and family of the cast and other liberal apologists) responded just as scripted, with roars of laughter and applause.

Then there was a game show skit called quiz bowl (supposed to be a parady of Knowledge Bowl). It pitted three normal kids from some public school against three homeschool kids from the "Jasper family". Most of the questions were science related, the homeschool kids buzzed in first and got every answer wrong by giving some sort of "cultic" fringe fundamentalist answer that was represented as being "Christian". Most of it was organized around making Christians (like Sarah Palin?) appear to be whacko's who don't believe in the most obvious truths of science.

Then during the "Weekend Update" segment they had a character named "Alaska Pete" who basically came out and mocked Palin.

All in all, a pretty cheap attack ad for Obama. Ahh... that's right. Barack Obama was supposed to be on that episode also. But he said it was just too close to 9-11 to be on a comedy show. Ya think maybe the real reason was he wanted to distance himself from such partisan media attacks by NBC?

Papal Thought

2008-09-13T22:35:00.001-07:00

Here is a post with some links to various Papal Encyclicals regarding pressing issues of the day. I will post them by their english title. The official titles are of course in Latin. Some of them are a little difficult to read, and some are not. Some are truly humbling (at least for me) when you realize the depth of thought that exists outside your own. All are very enlightening.

Rights and Duties of Capital and Labor the landmark teaching from Pope Leo XIII regarding workers and industry in the new world economy emerging in the 19th Century.

Human Life The prophetic teaching and explanation of proper Christian thought on contraception. Pope Paul VI

Gospel of Life John Paul II's remarkable letter expanding on Paul VI's encyclical. Really the seminole teaching on the value of all human life.

Faith and Reason John Paul II showing how faith and reason are not in opposition to each other, but compliment each other. It was sure nice having a world class philosopher as Pope.

Centissimus Annus JP II expanding on Rerum Novarum on it's 100th anniversary.

Saved Though Hope Benedict XVI, an explanation of what is hope. Very interesting in how it shows that placing hope in "salvation" though science and civil government is false. An absolute must read, especially in these days of Barack Obama and his whole HOPE slogan. After reading this encyclical, you will be better able to explain why Obama makes you ill. Also, it illuminates what is so stupid about liberals wanting to be called "progressives" as if it is flattering.

Sarah Palin Sex Scandal

2008-09-13T09:08:00.000-07:00

I have been very pleased so far with Sarah Palin and the McCain campaign strategy of promoting her positive traits. I believe that the left has played their role exactly as expected. They couldn't have been more predictable in their vitriol if they had actually been following a written script. It's almost as if the same Republican strategist has provided both camps with their talking points.

The liberal feminist's are showing that "Envy Green" and "Leftist Lavendar" are their true colors and not "Parity Pink". You see; NOW, the League of Women Voters, etc... don't exist to promote the cause of women being treated with equality in society. They exist to secure power for the political left by delivering the votes of a particular demographic group. They are completely intollerant of social viewpoints that don't conform to their leftist social agenda. They owe their allegiance to the leftist political philosophy more than they do to women.

They see the emergance of Sarah Palin as a scandal to their cause. "How is it that Governor Palin can be successful and not goose step with the liberal femenists?" they wonder. They actually can't comprehend and won't tolerate a woman holding a social philosophy that includes a pro-life agenda. It goes against what they've been brainwashed with for decades, that the pro-life agenda is born of men trying to control women and limit their choices.

So... they attack Governor Palin and the Republicans for using her gender exploitatively. How ironic to be accused by liberals of exploiting a particular demographic group through political pandering and candidate selection. I believe that this is part of what Pope Benedict XVI was referring to when he preached against the "Dictatorship of Relativism".

Here is a list of Sarah Palin's scandalous positions:
1. She is pro-life (and she's a women...? she must be brainwashed or dumb)
2. She Believes in traditional marriage.
3. She isn't a member of the "Lavendar Mafia".

Here is what NOW president Kim Gandy said of Governor Palin;

“She may be an intelligent, motivated, highly successful professional woman,” NOW President Kim Gandy said, “but she’s the wrong woman. She’s a bad woman. She’s not even half the woman Joe Biden is.”
Gandy cited Biden’s support for pay equity, his authorship of landmark domestic violence legislation, and his “lovely tribute to his mother” in his own acceptance speech as stark contrasts to Palin, who, according to Gandy, “foolishly believes in carrying all pregnancies to term” and “has consistently put herself and her career ahead of the fight for women’s rights.”
“It would be best for everyone if Sarah Palin would just stay home and raise her kids,” Gandy said. ”When you have one child with Down syndrome and another with an unwanted pregnancy who won’t even consider the ease and convenience of abortion, you need to be a better mother, not Vice President.”

So... the Sarah Palin sex scandal is this. Sarah Palin doesn't think like the liberals have been telling people of her sex to. How dare she think for herself and be successful without worshipping at their altar!

Questions for members of labor unions on abortion

2008-09-10T18:39:00.000-07:00

For the last 13+ years as a professional firefighter, I have been privileged to belong to a labor union. In that time, I have served in various capacities including my current position as assistant V.P. I believe this membership in a labor union is a privilege for several reasons; early in my career I benefitted from the union’s, and specifically from my Local leadership’s dedication to ensuring that all represented employees are treated with justice. Also, my membership has afforded me the opportunity to express to those with opposing viewpoints and opinions, the moral and philosophical justification of the labor movement in regards to workers rights, and its’ contribution to a just society. To many, I appear to be enigmatic in my seemingly contradictory embracement of positions traditionally held and championed by opposing political parties with contradictory liberal and conservative philosophies.

I realize that for some, membership in a union is simply a necessity of employment with the only requirement being the payment of monthly dues. For others, it’s no different than membership in some social fraternal organization (e.g. the “Elks”, “Eagles”, or “American Legion”). For many it is seen as an opportunity to have a voice in the workplace and in the local, state, and national political discourse. For me it’s all of those things, and something much more.

Before I explain, let me ask:

Do you support the labor movement? Do you promote the cause of workers receiving a livable wage? Do you believe that the hours of work required of laborers should be limited by contract rules and statutes that include mandatory overtime pay? Should employers be responsible for providing a workplace free of unnecessary health risks and disparity in the treatment of workers based on their race, creed, skin color, gender, religious affiliation, or sexual orientation?

Are your answers to those questions just simply your opinion? Is there no right or wrong answer? Is your “yes” simply because supporting and promoting those causes puts money into your pocket, improves your economic and social condition, and gives you power? Does it come down to the simple idea of “Might makes Right” born of the 18th century “Will to Power” philosophers that inspired Marxism and National Socialism? If supporters of "organized labor's" issues happen to be in power because they win a popular election does that establish or prove the truth of those positions regarding workers (and anyone else’s) rights? Is there no right or wrong but only the powerful and the powerless?

I think not. I believe that the cause for worker’s rights is worthy of being supported because they are based on an objective moral truth. That is; all people have the right to be treated with dignity, respect, and justice simply due to the fact that they are human persons. Collectively; workers rights, minority rights, religious rights, freedom of speech, freedom of self determination… are basic human rights issues. Those who are powerless are still entitled to those rights (such as the people in Darfur) and when deprived of them, it is recognized as a human rights violation.

To deprive someone of these rights is an injustice. All injustices are wrong. However, some injustices have more grave consequence on the victim than others do. Therefore it can be said that all injustices are equally wrong, but all wrongs are not equally unjust. For Example; it is rightly recognized by our judicial system that stealing a pack of gum is an injustice and is therefore against the law (a misdemeanor). Embezzling someone’s pension is also stealing, but is a worse injustice and therefore the consequences of breaking that law are greater (a felony with prison time).

As you readily see, the more grave the consequence of a wrong, the worse the injustice that has been committed. The Founding Father’s of our country rightly recognized that we have "...certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness...” arranged in that order out of right reason not coincidence. To pursue happiness you must be free, to be free (have liberty) you must first be alive! To be alive is the foundation of all these rights because we're talking about a human person who is alive.

To work for protecting the rights of people in regards to workers justice is good. But, it is only good as long as you are not denying them a superior right. You can't promote a grave injustice while protecting a hierarchically inferior issue of social justice. To do so opposes the integration of human rights into our society, thus disintegrating human rights.

The protection of innocent human life, from conception to natural death, must be promoted by organized labor and all interested in a civil society. This encompasses the issues of abortion, destructive embryonic stem cell research, human cloning, and euthanasia (“death with dignity”). To promote other human rights issues at the expense of, or while simultaneously attacking a hierarchically superior right, (specifically the right to life upon which all other human rights are contingent), is an abomination of justice.

Every day approximately 3,200 (ref. CDC 2008 statistics) unborn infants lives’ are ended through procured abortions in the United States. It is the single most important human rights issue of our time, and I daresay, of all time. We must protect and promote the rights of workers to fair wages, reasonable hours, and healthy working conditions. Just not at the expense of innocent people’s lives.

The endorsement of candidates for political office who defend this human rights violation is not warranted. Especially from a union that represents a profession dedicated to protecting people's lives.

Christian Voter part 3: Embryonic Stem Cell Research

2008-08-29T11:42:00.000-07:00

Seattle Seahawks training camp opens!!

2008-07-25T18:24:00.000-07:00

Finally, NFL training camps are open. Not that I don't like other sports but Football reigns supreme as far as I'm concerned. I can't stand NBA basketball (March Madness is good though). Baseball is OK when the playoffs come around. I like soccer more and more every year. but... back to the NFL!

The Seahawks are gearing up for another campaign. This year looks to be very interesting and has quite a few side stories. An offense with some question marks, a defense set to dominate, a lame duck head coach, the replacement head coach on staff...

I'll try to hit on a few of those stories throughout the season. Today though, I will highlight some training camp news.

OFFENSE: The biggest news of the offseason was the release of Shaun Alexander (2005 MVP ['06-'07 softy]) and the additions of TJ Duckett and Julius Jones. The Seahawks also drafted F.B. Owen Schmitt from West Virginia, T.E. John Carlson from Notre Dame and H.B. Justin Forsett from California. The Hawks signed LG Mike Wahle from Carolina in an attempt to shore up a suspect offensive line. Perhaps the most important move however, was bringing in Mike Solari as the offensive line coach. Bill Lazor (QB's), Kasey Dunn (RB's) and Mike Debord (Asst. O' line).

All of the rookies were in camp on the first day with the exception of John Carlson. His agent must be playing some real hardball with the Hawks since Seattle is hurting so bad at TE. I sure hope he doesn't miss much camp as the offense will be difficult to learn.

Wide Receiver: Bobby Engram was in camp on the first day much to the relief of everyone. Bobby would like to restructure his contract but decided to honor Mike Holmgren and his contract by not holding out. Overall I'd say that receiver is the biggest question mark. Losing DJ Hackett was big, Branch has been very fragile. Burleson and Engram will probably be the starters on opening day. Don't be surprised to see Seneca Wallace work his way in at receiver or slot every once in a while now that Charlie Frye has a year under his belt with Holmgren.

Running Back: will be fun to watch this year. While I wouldn't expect as dominant a running game as in '05, it will be greatly improved over the last two seasons. Jones and Duckett hit the hole hard, and Morris should be running like someone with something to prove. The big sleepers in my estimation are; O. Schmitt (I hope that's what they put on his jersey) and Forsett. Schmitt is a head banging brawler, I believe him to be very similar to Mike Alstott. And Justin Forsett who is simply a play maker. Wouldn't be surprised to see him returning punts and kickoffs.

Quarter Back: Matt (Isn't his NFL Network commercial great) should be an NFC Pro-bowler again. Frye will probably be competing for the two spot with Wallace.

O Line: Jones is getting long in the tooth and is starting to get beat (3-7 times a year). The addition of Wahle should help improve things (as should some running backs who will hit the hole on their feet instead of curling up and falling down). They won't be great like '05, but they will be better than the last two seasons.

Christian Voter part 2: Abortion

2008-07-23T09:58:00.000-07:00

I now come to the seven issues to which there is only 1 legitimate position for a Christian voter. To take the opposite position (through activism, or by placing your vote), would be indicative of a corrupted conscience or a disingenuous spirit of compromising moral truth for the spirit of the age.

Issue #1 Abortion:

What: Abortion - The intentional termination of a pregnancy by direct mechanical means or medicinal means.

Other names: Choice, reproductive choice, womens sexual health, reduction (when there is a pregnancy with multiple babies), emergency contraception, infanticide.

What the Catholic Church officially teaches regarding Abortion:
2270 Human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception. From the first moment of his existence, a human being must be recognized as having the rights of a person - among which is the inviolable right of every innocent being to life.
Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you.
My frame was not hidden from you, when I was being made in secret, intricately wrought in the depths of the earth.

2271 Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion. This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable. Direct abortion, that is to say, abortion willed either as an end or a means, is gravely contrary to the moral law:
You shall not kill the embryo by abortion and shall not cause the newborn to perish.
God, the Lord of life, has entrusted to men the noble mission of safeguarding life, and men must carry it out in a manner worthy of themselves. Life must be protected with the utmost care from the moment of conception: abortion and infanticide are abominable crimes.

2272 Formal cooperation in an abortion constitutes a grave offense. The Church attaches the canonical penalty of excommunication to this crime against human life. "A person who procures a completed abortion incurs excommunication latae sententiae," "by the very commission of the offense," and subject to the conditions provided by Canon Law. The Church does not thereby intend to restrict the scope of mercy. Rather, she makes clear the gravity of the crime committed, the irreparable harm done to the innocent who is put to death, as well as to the parents and the whole of society.

2273 The inalienable right to life of every innocent human individual is a constitutive element of a civil society and its legislation:
"The inalienable rights of the person must be recognized and respected by civil society and the political authority. These human rights depend neither on single individuals nor on parents; nor do they represent a concession made by society and the state; they belong to human nature and are inherent in the person by virtue of the creative act from which the person took his origin. Among such fundamental rights one should mention in this regard every human being's right to life and physical integrity from the moment of conception until death."
"The moment a positive law deprives a category of human beings of the protection which civil legislation ought to accord them, the state is denying the equality of all before the law. When the state does not place its power at the service of the rights of each citizen, and in particular of the more vulnerable, the very foundations of a state based on law are undermined. . . . As a consequence of the respect and protection which must be ensured for the unborn child from the moment of conception, the law must provide appropriate penal sanctions for every deliberate violation of the child's rights."

I used here the official teaching of the Catholic Church as defined in the official Catechism. The teaching contained there however is not such that Christians from other ecclesial communities would encounter doctrinal difficulty in embracing it. No Christian can in good conscience support legalized abortion or candidates who; facilitate, embrace, champion, safeguard, or enable legalized abortion.

Politicians who declare that, "I oppose abortion, personally, I don't like abortion. I believe life does begin at conception. But I can't take my religious belief, my article of faith, and legislate it on... [someone] who doesn't share it. We have separation of church and state in the United States of America." are dishonest with themselves and with everyone.

How about if you are an athiest or agnostic politician who opposes abortion?
How about if you are a Muslim politician but your stance against abortion is strictly scientific?
Why isn't a person allowed to use metaphysical philosophy to inform their consience?

Politicians who make statements about "not forcing their religious views..." aren't being truthful. What they really care about is keeping in the good graces of their party and keeping the money rolling in from their special interest groups.

Christian Worship vs Christotaintment

2008-07-22T10:18:00.000-07:00

I read this story and found it to be rather silly. One of the things that I remember from my sojourn through various Protestant (Evangelical, Main-Line, Fundamentalist) churches was that they focused on the entertainment aspect of the Sunday worship service. Mostly the "Evangelical" and "Fundamentalist" communities, but also the Main-Line (Protestant Churches more than 100 years old) churches to a lesser degree. Contemporary music is a very important aspect of this entertainment. Often times I even found it to be the focus of the service.

Plays and skits were also frequent tools used during the service. Again the focus was on entertaining the people present, while delivering a message.

I think that these type of low, irreverant forms of church services have led to a general lack of "awe", respect, and "fear of the Lord" in American Christianity. What else could account for a T-Shirt line like this...

Now back to the pastor who wrecked his motorcycle in church and broke his wrist. He was going to use the motorcycle to show how we must become one with Christ. I suppose by showing that when you sit on a motorcyle to ride it, you become part of the bike. Whatever, I see the analogy and I think that it could be an effective, albeit silly, way of explaining we must unite ourselves with Christ.

These innovative ways of conducting a church service become necessary when a community is cut off from the Traditions/traditions of Christ's Church. And when a community is cut of from authentic tradition, it necessarily creates it's own traditions. Christ himself prayed for us to have unity (John 17: 20-26), and he put the structure in place for us to be united. Through the hands of the priest, we receive the great gift of the Eucharist. Through this Eucharist, we are able to be united with Christ, his Church, and each other. As St. Paul said in Ephesians; "There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of us all, who is above all and through all and in all."

Now, the Catholic Church has it's own problems with innovation of the liturgy

The problem with all of these "Christotainment" versions of worship service is this. It makes man the focus of our worship. It makes man the focus of the liturgy. It makes worship and praise horizontal and not vertical.

Immigration President Bush and the Economy

2008-07-18T09:23:00.000-07:00

I think I figured it out. Since President Bush and Congress can't seem to figure out a comprehensive immigration policy they did the next best thing.

They mismanaged the economy such that nobody will want to immigrate.

MLS Soccer player to Catholic Priesthood

2008-07-17T12:35:00.000-07:00

I came across this news story and thought I would share it.

You often hear that there is a shortage of vocations to the priesthood. I don't think so however. I think there is a lack of answering the call to a vocation as a priest. Why is there this lack of answering the call? I think there are several reasons, I will give one here.

Parents don't embrace or promote the priesthood for their sons. This is done both directly and indirectly. A subtle way that this lack of support for a vocation to the priesthood is exhibited is in the way parents talk with their children and others about their children's future. Here is an example of a typical conversation between parents and their son.

Mother: "Johnny, when you grow up and have a family of your own, then you'll have the same rules for you your kids"

or

Dad: "Andrew, you need to go to college so that you can have a good job to be able to support your wife and children"

I've heard it thousands of times. There is an underlying assumption that a sons vocation is to the married life. It pervades a persons speech. It generates assumptive language when discussing the future of their children. It isn't a direct hinderance to following a call to the priesthood. But it creates a manner of thinking about the future that excludes the priesthood for young men. This in turn causes young men to reject those thoughts about being a priest when they begin to appear in their conscience because, the only normal thing in all their discussions with family is being a husband and dad.

Whenever I talk with my son, I consciously make a point of including the priesthood as a possible part of his future. Here is an example of my coversation with my son.

ME: "When you grow up and have a parish of people who depend on you, or a wife and kids that depend on you, you'll be glad that I tought you that a person needs to do their chores everyday."

Me: "It's important to learn how to talk with people and to learn how to listen to people because if you have a wife and kids, you need to be able to do those things. And if you are a priest, you have to be able to give people really good advice during confessions or spiritual direction."

I think if people would just make that subtle contextual change in their speech, there would be a dramatic increase in young men following their call to a vocation to the priesthood.

World Youth Day

2008-07-14T06:42:00.000-07:00

The Pope is in Australia for World Youth Day. I offer my prayers up for this to be a blessed event for everyone. I was reading through several of the news reports off the wire. For the most part the coverage is fairly typical; "The Pope has his questions screened", "...sexual abuse scandal...", "the Pope is old...", "the Pope doesn't hang out with the rest of us in the back of the plane". "the Pope wears red shoes". ad. nauseum...

I think the issue is that people try to fit the Pope, (and with him, the Church) in to a tidy little partisan political box. All other world leaders are of some particular political ideology. But the Pope, to most main stream media, is an enigma. One minute he is defending and promoting the traditional model of marriage being reserved to one women and one man. Then he goes and exhorts people to care for the environment and to fight against global warming. It brings about a type of journalistic schizophrenia. So, they try to ignore the things he says which conflict with their secular philosophical sensibilities (or misrepresent and attack them) and concentrate on shouting out to the world that, "EVEN THE POPE PROMOTES ENVIRONMENTALIST ISSUES".

For jounalists it must be like when Charlie Brown's teacher talked. They hear "blah, blah, blah blah whaah whah", when the issue cuts against their grain. Then they're surprised that the Pope actually gets it right when he is on the same side of an issue as them!

Truthfully I would suggest to everyone that when the Pope and you agree on an issue (specifically one that involves faith and morals), that means that you have somehow come to know the truth. When you and the Pope are on opposite sides, you should rethink your position.

You see, the problem isn't that the Pope teaches that certain things are right and wrong, regardless of public opinion (contraception, abortion, euthanasia, homosexual relations...). The problem is that all the other "Popes" don't like the real deal. Some creatures can't stand the light!

HABMUS PAPAM!!

Christian Voter

2008-07-13T08:03:00.000-07:00

Another presidential election is upon us and news stories of the two candidates and their faith frequently find their way on the air and on the page. Typically the "news" centers around polling numbers. How candidate "X" is doing with demographic "Z" and so forth. I feel it's lazy journalism to constantly focus on polling and demographics. I think it leads to a lazy and uninformed electorate. Kind of a "Democracy for Dummies" thing.

"You don't want to study issues and make an informed decision? Just study the polling numbers (statistics) and find out how much support a candidate has from your demographic group(s) and vote along with the majority of them!" What a dumb way to decide how to vote. I think investigating poll numbers has a place in the decision making process, but only so far as it leads you to investigate the issues that are attributed to the numbers revealed by the poll.

In my opinion, political polling is simply an instrument used by the political parties to generate momentum for their candidates with individual demographic groups. The news media (CNN, FOX, MSNBC, ABC, CBS) use their polling data to influence the election in favor of their favorite candidate.

All that being said... how is a serious Christian supposed to approach this election? I'm not going to get bogged down by declaring what a Christian is or isn't. That's not the focus of this post. I'll let the individual's self identification stand as the yard stick. The focus will be on the candidates stance on issues that afford only one legitimate position based on fundamental human rights and right moral principle. There are issues that afford serious Christians the opportunity to legitimately hold divergent positions such as immigration policy, tax policy, education...

Here is my list of issues that only afford one legitimate position consistent with Cristian faith and morals. In the following weeks I will explain what the one legitimate position is for the Christian voter.

1. Legalized Abortion
2. Embryonic Stem Cell Research
3. Euthanasia ("Mercy Killing, "Assisted Suicide", "Death With Dignity")
4. Human Cloning
5. Homosexual "Marriage"
6. Torture of Prisoners
7. Contraceptive Education

Obamabortion

2008-07-12T09:40:00.000-07:00

Found this interesting political caricature of the American Secular Messiah Obama "ASMO"

It got me wondering how many people actually know what his voting record or interest group rating is on abortion as opposed to his "campaign speak".

curious

2008-07-06T12:09:00.000-07:00

Just wondering.

It seems that during my "time in the desert" as far as posting is concerned that there has been a lot of visitors to "The Antisophist". Not sure why the activity level picked up, so I was wondering if some of you could enlighten me?

Done with my break

2008-07-02T09:59:00.000-07:00

Well, I just took an eight month break from blogging.

One big thing on my mind is a big change at my Parish. Fr. Freitag, Our pastor of 9 years, was transferred to another parish in the Archdiocese midway through his second term as our pastor. This was to fill a vacancy left at the other parish. His last week with us was at the end of June.

It is a difficult time for myself and my family because the departing pastor was the priest who helped me find my way back to the Catholic Church. His straightforward manner of presenting Catholic beliefs and practices were exactly what my wife (an evangelical Protestant) had been thirsting for since we met. She converted to the Catholic Church along with my oldest daughter, about 9 months after I returned.

I can't help but wonder how things would be different with the Catholic Church in the United States if all the bishops, priests, religious, and Catholic educators would simply present the faith without watering it down to make it more "palatable" or "friendly". It seems as if there exists a great hesitency in being straighforward about the faith. I think it's derived from a false sense of ecumanism, from being so worried about offending or challenging a persons ideas, beliefs, or conscience that people, (cradle Catholics, Protestants, and others) are left with an ignorance regarding what the Catholic Church actually teaches.

To highlight just two of the things my wife learned:

1: Jesus established a Church that was/is both visible and corporate, and entrusted the leadership of that Church with the Apostles. The Apostle Simon was specially called and placed by Christ as the leader of the Apostles and the Church. Simon's name was changed by Jesus to Cephas (Aramaic for rock). This showed that he was blessed and specially annointed by God for his new lifes role (the leader of the Church). No where in scripture does God change someones name without it being a blessing. A name change always indicates a calling, and defines a role that the individual will fill.

Abram to Abraham
Sarai to Sarah
Jacob to Israel
Hosea to Joshua
Simon to Cephas (Peter)

2: The Eucharist IS the body, blood, soul, and divinity of Christ. It isn't a symbol, it isn't somehow both bread & wine and body & blood (as it is for those who want it both ways) the substance of the bread and wine are completely transformed into the substance of Christ. This can only be believed through faith, because our physical senses fail us in discovering this truth. We are called to "...eat the flesh and drink the blood..." of Christ in order to have His life in us.

Those are only two of the numerous things that my wife had illuminated for her through Fr. Freitag and his RCIA program. Fr. Freitag ensured that everything taught was from, or derived from, the Catechism of the Catholic Church, or from Magesterial documents. My wife originally went to the RCIA classes simply to learn what it was that I believed. She didn't feel compelled to convert until about 6 weeks in to the class. This desire to convert came through the conviction of the Holy Spirit after having heard the truth of the Gospel in a faithful RCIA program. If only all RCIA programs told the truth without addition or subtraction based on some persons personal agenda and ulterior motives.

Thank God for good and holy priests such a Fr. Patrick Freitag. We wish him well at his new assignment with St. Monica's Parish on Mercer Island.

Westboro Baptist Church puts the "dam(n)" in fundamentalist

2007-10-26T06:04:00.000-07:00

This Group makes me sick.

Now they have been sued and are in court for attacking a fallen Marine's funeral.

I hope they finally get what's coming to them. Here are some examples of their disgusting version of free speech and freedom of religion.

Pull Your Pants Up!!

2007-10-24T05:46:00.000-07:00

I must be officially old. It drives me up the wall when I see guys (and sometimes girls?!?!) with their pants like this.

This is a funny campaign for a city to have to do on a billboard. I can't see this working though. At least Dallas is trying though.

Politicians and "Personal Faith"

2007-10-24T05:40:00.000-07:00

I just read this article and thought it explained some things nicely.

Boxer Blames Bush For Fire Damage

2007-10-23T19:17:00.000-07:00

Barbara Boxer, (yes it was difficult just to type her name) blamed President Bush, (watch the John Gibson video here) for the widespread fire damage because there would be twice as many guard troops and equipment to fight the fires if all those guard troops weren't deployed fighting that damn war in Iraq (that she voted FOR!!!).

What a load of crap. I looked into the facts, here they are;

California has somewhere between 21,000 and 25,000 National Guard members.

Currently about 3,000-4,500 of those troops are "deployed".

That's mostly from one unit, the 1st Brigade of the 40th ID.

around 85% of the California guard troops aren't deployed. A logical assumption would be that around 85% of their equipment isn't deployed either, (though you don't use army tanks and howitzers to fight fires).

Barbara Boxer is an ingnoramus attempting to make political hay from a tragic diasaster. What a Neo-Scalawag.

Christian Heritage Week

2007-10-23T07:37:00.000-07:00

Much to my surprise, governor Chris Gregoire has declared that this week (Oct 21-27) as Christian Heritage Week. The News report on it is o.k. though there is some careful wording at the beginning of the article which establishes some opposition to the idea without coming out and directly opposing it. Here is the text of her proclamation:

WHEREAS, the Declaration of Independence declares that governments are to secure our
creator-endowed unalienable rights to “Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness;” and
WHEREAS, our country was founded in part because of the desire of people to have the
freedom to worship as they please;
NOW THEREFORE, I, Christine O. Gregoire, Governor of the State of Washington, do
hereby proclaim October 21-27, 2007 as Christian Heritage Week.

I appreciate this effort on behalf of Governor Gregoire.

Here is an example of Christian influence in the settling of Washington State. This was written in 1912. You have to page down to find the specific portion regarding Christian history.

Here are the current demographics of religion in Washington
The religious affiliations of Washington's population are:
Christian – 63%
Protestant – 29%
Lutheran – 6%
Baptist – 6%
Methodist – 4%
Presbyterian – 3%
Other Protestant or general Protestant – 10%
Catholic – 20%
Other Christian – 11%
Latter-day Saint; 3%
Other Religions – 5%
Refused – 6%
No religion – 25%

As with many other Western states, the percentage of Washington's population identifying themselves as "non-religious" is higher than the national average. The percentage of non-religious people in Washington is the highest of any state, and its Christian population is the lowest of any state.

All Clear!!

2007-10-22T13:04:00.000-07:00

The Troll(s) have been identified. It was only a drill. It was good practice in the case of an actual Troll sighting or infestation. Let's go over the procedures again

1. identify the Troll(s) [they often work in pairs or groups, like wolfpacks]
2. give the Troll(s) a warning
3. begin shoveling up their feces [offensive posts]
4. enact security measures [turn on the comment approval button]

Thanks for the training to you Troll simulators.

reader comments will now be posted without delay.

Pets

2007-10-22T12:30:00.000-07:00

A previous commentor accused me of hating cats back in the This Is Stupid post.

Anonymous said...
So... you don't like cats? Is that what you are trying to say?

Nothing could be farther from the truth. I love pets. Just last shift we had a fire where the home was pretty much a total loss. The residents were out of the area. We rescued their two cats from the basement after we found them while searching for people.

The cats were very scared, wet, hot, and one had the hair on his tail burned. Animal control would not come out to take custody of the cats until the next day, (the fire was around midnight). So we took the cats back to the fire station in the engine. I stopped at safeway on the way back and talked with the manager about getting some cat food. You see, we didn't have any money on us. So there I am standing in safeway at 2:00 AM wearing my dirty bunker gear asking the manager for a free bag of cat food. He gave it to me of course, (I paid him after I got off duty).

We cleaned the cats up, fed and watered them. The owners stopped by and retrieved their cats later. Many, many times I have seen the positive influence pets can have on people. They truly are a blessing on us humans. They give us an opportunity to put into practice stewardship over creation and can help lead us to a certain degree of faith and knowledge of God's love. Caring for another life and nurturing it can give us some insight in to God's care and nurturing of us. When those pets die, they leave us with a very real sadness.

A friend's pet recently passed. It was a cat and was so magnificent that it was named "The MagnifiCAT".

Here is a poem dedicated to pets and their owners.

Because I'm only human,
it's sometimes hard to be
the wise, all knowing creature
that my cat expects of me.

And so I pray for special help,
to somehow understand
the subtle implications,
of each proud miaowed command.

Oh, let me not forget that chairs
were put on earth to shred;
and what I like to call a lap
is actually a cat-bed.

I know it's really lots to ask
but please, oh please, take pity;
and though I'm only human,
make me worthy of my kitty!

Author Unknown

SOCAL FIRES!!

2007-10-22T12:14:00.000-07:00

Hot dry Santa Anna winds are fanning the flames in Southern California. I'm glad I don't work down there. What a madhouse.

Some things I've learned in my short 13 years as a firefighter:

1. When you are driving code (red lights and sirens) don't expect people to yield the right of way.
2. Corollary to #1; When driving code, expect other drivers to do the most ridiculous and unexpected things with their cars. (I actually had a lady come to a complete stop in the middle of the road and put both hands over her ears while closing her eyes.)
3. Whenever you go to an apartment complex for a medical emergency, someone will come up to you and announce that they are the manager. Then they will ask you what’s going on. After you tell them it’s none of their business (by politely informing them that it’s a private medical matter) they will again remind you that they are the manager. Then you tell them “o.k. are you their doctor? Because they don’t need their landlord right now.”
4. Those curbs with the red paint that appear to say “NO PARKING, FIRE LANE” actually say, “Park Here IF You Are More Important Than Other People”.
5. In an emergency situation the general public makes SSD’s, SNAP STUPID DECISIONS. In other words, put them in a situation where immediately making a good decision is necessary due to an imminent threat to life or property and they will make a bad decision.
6. People don’t like to leave their homes, their pets, or their “stuff” behind.

Blog Trolls

2007-10-21T14:46:00.000-07:00

Sorry for the delay in seeing your posts. I have some Blog Trolls
(see definition 1) who have decided that making witty and or insightful comments aren't enough.

I will be very tolerant of opposing viewpoints and commentary. I'm not looking to simply have a blog where everyone agrees with me and or eachother. But when the opposing commentary begins to degenerate into simple baiting, name calling, dead horse beating, or defamation, I won't let it stand.

So on an interim basis, I will be approving all comments before they are posted. Don't sweat it though, I won't censor authentic comments simply because I don't agree with the idea. It just may take some time before you see your comment on the blog.

What did they know, and when did they know it?

2007-10-21T07:37:00.000-07:00

Not sure what to believe in this whole saga. I just smell something "funny".

Here we go again.

2007-10-19T20:17:00.000-07:00

81st Brigade put on alert for Iraq/Afghan deployment.

One thing will be different this time howver. My brother won't be there to make them look good. (Hey Anonymous. This is what a real live Sergeant First Class in the United States ARMY looks like)

Holidays? Sea-Tac

2007-10-19T20:09:00.000-07:00

I just read this story. I remember the big flap last year.

I only have one question. What holidays are the port of Seattle intending to honor with this display of birch trees? Kwanza? Channuka? Christmas? Winter Solstice? As far as I know none of those holidays use icey birch trees as a symbol of their holiday.

Who's Kid's are they?

2007-10-18T10:47:00.000-07:00

This story makes me sick.

Why is it that parents must give specific permission before their child is able to receive OTC cold, or pain medication? Why is it not necessary to receive specific parental permission before giving a minor child birth control medicine, some of which contains powerful hormones? How is it possible that this would be medically prudent?

This is simply a trampling of parental rights. It's all politics and not at all medical.

Those who favored the plan said it isn't about encouraging premature sex, but protecting kids who don't have strong support from their parents.
"Unfortunately, not every child is getting the kind of parental involvement that is going to help keep them safe," said Richard Verrier.

What a load of sophistry.

Sea Story II

2007-10-18T09:58:00.000-07:00

Time for another Sea Story,

I was a fire controlman in the Navy. What a fire control technician does is pretty cool. We maintain and operate the digital fire control system. In other words, we do all the repair and maintenance on the system that is used to track contacts from all the different sensors (sonar, radar, periscope). And we operated the fire control system by determining the range, course, and speed of different targets after evaluating the bearing data over time. Then we would figure out how to shoot those targets with torpedos, (or tomahawk missles).

Our watchstanding involved maintaining current solutions on all contacts in order to provide the Captain with an overall picture of the tactical situation.

Whenever we went to periscope depth we had to do specific things to ensure that we were certain of the "solutions" on all contacts. The Captain would come up to the control room and the OOD would inform the captain of where he believed all the contacts were. The Captain would then give the OOD permision to come to periscope depth. After several years onboard I had developed a reputation of being very good at this part of my job, (getting solutions). The Captain would receive the report from the OOD and we would begin our ascent to persicope depth. The OOD would be riding the scope and the Captain would lean down and quietly ask me, "allright, what are these guys really doing?" It was nice to have the Captain have that much trust and respect for my abilities.

Now, whenever we were at periscope depth at night time, the control room would be "rigged for black", meaning all the lights would be out. This made it hard to see. The seat I was in was within arms length of the persiscope. Now, usually when the scope was out there would be a crowd of 5 or so people standing around the periscope station waiting to "take a turn". I always found this to be annoying because they would be bumping in to me. It was usually the J.O.'s who were there to get experience (or say they were they for official reasons when they really just wanted to see outside). So I started to play a game. Remember it was dark?? Well, I would reach over in to the group and pinch one of them on the butt. Usually the guy on the scope. I did this for a couple of years (about three or four patrols) without ever getting caught. I got J.O.'s, the CO, the XO, the NAV... whoever. Then on my last patrol, we were at periscope depth, rigged for black. The Captain was on the scope. I was reaching my hand over and was just about to pinch... and the Captain says in a low voice, "fire control, if you touch me... you'll be down in my stateroom later accross a green table from me" (meaning I would go to Captains Mast [non-judicial punishment]). "Aye Aye Captain" I say.

After we came down from periscope depth the Captain came over to me with a grin on his face and basically told me that he had known all along that it had been me doing it and that I should never assume that the Captain doesn't know what's going on. But, the gig was up and I should find something else to do now.

The Last March of the Ents

2007-10-17T06:56:00.000-07:00

Read this story and tell me if it gives you the creeps also.

I just think that we may be starting something that we will lose control of.

Next thing you know, we'll be having this in our backyard...

Sea Story

2007-10-16T05:50:00.000-07:00

My First Haircut

Life on a submarine for a new sailor (Non-qual, dink, scumbag, puke, nub) is very interesting and full of excitement. Even the most mundane of activities has an exciting air for a non-qual. I remember my first day underway. This is after I had awaken from a long sleep following finishing up my tour as a Crank (a guy on K.P. duty AKA cooks slave). I had quals to work on. So... being the smart non-qual that I was , I headed back to Machinery Two. As fortune would have it, there was a crowd of about 7 A-Gangers in AMR third level. I walked in and announced that I was ready for a checkout on some system (can't remember which one). Well, the COB (Chief of the Boat, [command Master Chief for you skimmers]) happened to be in the room shooting the breeze with the guys. He said I could have a checkout under one condition. I had to sit in the stool and everytime I got a wrong answer they would; spin me in circles, stop my spinning by grabbing my hair, cut off a handful of hair with the COB's pocketknife. Sounded good to me...

I didn't know as much about the system as I thought I knew. Wow!! there's a lot of little specific information to know for even the simplest equipment on a submarine. Like, "How many times did I have to retap the thread on the third bolt securing that pump to the deck?" I sure had a great haircut though. I looked like a Chernoble survivor! I walk up to the computer room which is just past the XO's and CO's staterooms. The XO notices me and gasps.

XO- "Sailor!? What happened to your hair?

ME- "I got it cut XO." (ask a dumb question...)

XO- "What the hell was used to cut your hair?"

ME- "It was a knife."

XO- "Did you do it yourself?"

ME- "No sir, it was done by some other people."

XO- "Who did this to you?"

ME- "You know sir, I'm so new that I can't really remember who they were."

XO- "You're not that new... Who was it!!?"

ME- "Sorry sir, I'm just not sure."

XO- "OK, where did it happen?"

ME- "Again sir, I'm so new that I don't really know my way around well enough. I'm not sure where I was."

XO- "Bullshit! You're dismissed!"

I took off and went and hid in DPER (pronounced deeper [the computer room]). Within 20 seconds you here over the 1MC, "Chief of the Boat, report to the XO's stateroom!" Well you could hear the XO explaining to the COB that he had better get to the bottom of the story regarding my haircut.

About 30 minutes later the messenger of the watch finds me and tells me to report to the Goat Locker (Chiefs Quarters). I walk in and find the COB and about 6 other chiefs sitting around in their lounge area. There is a stool, a towel, and some haircutting clippers. The COB sits me down and begins to cut my hair. He and the other chiefs visit with me, asking me questions about my childhood and my plans for the future. In the end the COB tells me, "You need to get out there and familiarize yourself with the boat and the rest of the crew now." Then he grabbed my qual card and signed it off for the system that my original "pocketknife checkout" had been for.

That COB saved my butt about a year in the future when I did something dumb on base. He had the reputation as being a mean old hardass. But, he took care of "his boys". Since the day I didn't rat him out, I became one of "his boys". That XO never did like me. But that's OK.

This Is Stupid

2007-10-15T15:36:00.000-07:00

So I'm watching the news out of PRS, (The People's Republic of Seattle), and they ran this big story about a family cat that had been shot. It was very serious and reporters were out on location to bring us the latest on this very important news event. The News reported that the cat had been shot and that the ".22 caliber bullet was still lodged in the abdomen" (of the cat). Now, most everybody is appalled that someone in the PRS was using a .22 to shoot cats. That is a dangerous thing since a .22 projectile travels with such high velocity.

NOW FOR THE REST OF THE STORY... It's not what the news said that's important here, it's what they didn't say, or chose to leave ambiguous so as to encourage us to believe something that wasn't true. Watch closely the video at the news link, at 40 secs into the video they show an x-ray of the "bullet" lodged in the cat. It's a .22 cal PELLET, shot from an AIR POWERED PELLET GUN. Now technically any projectile is a bullet, whether it's shot from a sling-shot, a hunting rifle, or a pellet gun. But here I think they wanted us to believe that something happened that didn't; That some crazed lunatic is out shooting a .22 caliber rifle in the PRS.

What's the agenda??? probably another brick getting set in the wall that is being erected to usurp our constitutional right to keep and bear arms.

The lady probably didn't follow the laws for controling your animals in the PRS anyway (leash laws). The person with the pellet gun was probably tired of having cat crap from her "Daisy Mae" in their flower bed. After never receiving a good response from the owner or the animal control folks they enacted a little "frontier justice".

Sorry if I sound cold but... I grew up on a farm, if you don't keep your animals on your own property, they're fair game. What happens if you don't is your fault.

News on the USS Virginia

2007-10-14T10:40:00.000-07:00

Check this out.

Applause for "The Vatican"

2007-10-14T09:10:00.000-07:00

This story has so much possibility for discussion. I will focus on on one thing however.

Referring to homosexual activity as something that is "against Vatican teaching" shows a lack of understanding of what the Catholic Church is, and what the Vatican is in regards to the Church.

There aren't several different Catholic teachings regarding homosexuality. There is only one teaching, click here to see what that is. Any "Catholic teaching" that is presented or offered regarding homosexuality that differs from the one at the link, is simply a personal opinion that is in error.

Jesus Christ established a Church. A visible Church with an official organization and leader. The Catholic Church recognizes itself as that Church and teaches that the fullness of God's revelation subsists within the Catholic Church.

The Bishop of Rome is the successor of the Apostle Peter as the Earthly head of Christ's Church. The Bishop of Rome maintains his "government" at a place named Vatican City. The Bishop of Rome (the Pope) maintains sovereign leadership over the Church. The Holy Spirit protects the Church from the Pope teaching in error with regards to matters of faith and morals (Papal invalibility).

I have found that when the media reports that "The Vatican" has made some "declaration", "announcement", or "determination" it is insinuating that it is only the Vatican that is saying something, and that the rest of the Church or other teachers in the Church, have seperate yet equal opinions or positions. They prop up "The Vatican" or "The Pope" or "The Roman Curia" as being simply some type of ignorant tryanical government that doesn't really speak for the people.

As Jesus told the Apostles, "He who rejects you, rejects Me."

The Church is Apostolic, has been since before the Catholic Bishops canonized scripture in the 400's. The Apostolic Church has but one voice, the Pope and the Bishops in communion with the Pope.

Submarine Bubblehead Humor

2007-10-12T18:52:00.000-07:00

OK..., Tubedaze and "Hey, Shipwreck" is very very funny

I haven't laughed this hard in a long time. Go to this website or here on Youtube to see what I'm talking about. It's an animated series from a talented bubblehead. Basically it's a social commentary on the funny, rediculous, stupid, crazy, zany, frustrating things that happen on a submarine from the perspective of a "blueshirt". Kind of a "Dilbert" for sailors, specifically submarine sailors. But the great thing is that besides some inside jokes everybod could relate to most of the observations. I know that it greatly resembles the fire department where I work.

WATCH ALL THE EPISODES IN ORDER, IT IS VERY REWARDING

To read about the artist in the Navy Times, click here.

I just wish he didn't call Henry M. Jackson an "obscure politician". Scoop was the man!! And "Scoops Diner" is a great place to eat.

Medal Of Honor

2007-10-12T16:24:00.000-07:00

Lt. Mike Murphy, a navy SEAL who was killed in action high in the mountains of Afghanistan, will receive the Medal Of Honor for his heroic actions. His parents will accept the Medal on his behalf from President Bush on October 22nd. To learn more about this great American read the book written by Marcus Luttrell, the sole surviving member of his SEAL team. The book is titled "Lone Survivor".

"Murph" wore the station patch from FDNY Engine 53 and Ladder 43 on the right sleeve of his uniform. He also aquired patches for each of his team members. They wore them so as not to forget how this war started with the cowardly attacks of 9/11/01 and in honor of the 343 firefighters who died in the line of duty with bravery and selfless dedication to the citizens of New York City.

God Bless America, God Bless the Murphy family, and may Lt. Murphy and his fellow team members who fell with him RIP, "....no greater love..."

Where would you send the letter?

2007-10-11T09:22:00.000-07:00

Muslim academics send out an open public letter addressed to Pope Benedict XVI, Bartholemew I - Patriarch of Constantinople, all other Orthodox Patriarchs, the Archbishop of Canterberry, and other leading Protestant's. I believe this to be an interesting development. I would rather it be a hopeful development, but due to the actions of many Muslim leaders I have a hard time trusting the sincerity of the stated intention (check out this site for examples).

That being said, I began to wonder what took so long for Muslim "leaders" to send out a communication such as this? Does it have anything to do with the Election cycle in the United States? Does it have anything to do with the beginning of the new U.N. session? And who would the letter have been sent to if it had been sent to the heads of all Christian Churches sometime in the past? On that note... let's step backwards in time using 100 year increments:

1907- Pope Pius X, Joachim III (Orthodox Patriarch Constantinople), Photius (Orthodox Patriarch Alexandria), Damianus I (Orthodox Patriarch Jerusalem) Ignatius Agdeb Aloho II (Syriac Coptic Patriarch Antioch), Randall Thomas Davidson (Church of England- Archbishop of Canterbury), Franz August Otto Pieper (Lutheran Church Missouri Synod) Mary Baker Eddy (Christian Scientist), General William Booth (Salvation Army), Henry Niehaus (New Apostolic Church), OK there are more leaders to list from the various churches around at that time (Methodist, Presbyterian, Baptist, Quacker, et. al.) but it's taking too long... there are probably 100 more names I could put here.

I'll start going in 200 year increments

1707- Pope Clement XI, Cyprianus I (Constantinople), Gerasimus II (Alexandria), Chrysanthus (Jerusalem), Ignatius George II (Antioch), Thomas Tenison (Archbishop Canterbury), Can't really find a definitive list... but letter would have been sent to Baptist, Lutheran, Presbyterian, (Methodism is 30 years from it's inception), Quackers, and various national/regional Orthodox Churches.

1507- Pope Julius II, Pachomius I (Constantinople), Joachim (Alexandria), Dorotheus II (Jerusalem), Ignatius Nuh of Lebanon (Antioch), Luther, Zwingli, Calvin, Henry VIII were at least 10 years away from the inception of their churches. This is also very shortly after King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella drove the last of the Moors from the Iberian peninsula.

1307- Pope Clement V, Athanasuis (Constantinople), Athanasius III (Alexandria), VACANT (Jerusalem), Michael II (Antioch),

1107- Pope Paschal II, Nicholas III Gramaticus (Constantinople), Sabbas (Alexandria), John VIII (Jerusalem), Athanasius VI bar Khamoro (Antioch),

I'll continue listing seperately the 4 patriarchs of the East, though they recognized the unique Primacy of the Bishop of Rome as the successor of Peter before 1054.

907- Pope Sergius III, Nicholas I Mystikos (Constantinople), Christodoulus (Alexandria), Elias III (Jerusalem), Dionysius II (Antioch)

707- Pope John VII, Cyrus (Constantinople), Theophylactus (Alexandria), John V (Jerusalem), Julian II (Antioch)

Follwing the Ecumenical Council of Chalcedon of 451 the Bishops of Constantinople and Jerusalem were added as Patriarchs, joining the Bishops of Rome, Alexandria, and Antioch. Thus 507 A.D. is the first year they will be listed seperately. Here is the council of Chalcedon's Confession;

Following the holy Fathers, we unanimously teach and confess one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ: the same perfect in divinity and perfect in humanity, the same truly God and truly man, composed of rational soul and body; consubstantial with the Father as to his divinity and consubstantial with us as to his humanity; "like us in all things but sin." He was begotten from the Father before all ages as to his divinity and in these last days, for us and for our salvation, was born as to his humanity of the virgin Mary, the Mother of God.
We confess that one and the same Christ, Lord, and only-begotten Son, is to be acknowledged in two natures without confusion, change, division, or separation. The distinction between natures was never abolished by their union, but rather the character proper to each of the two natures was preserved as they came together in one person (prosopon) and one hypostasis.

507- Pope Symmachus, Macedonius II (Constantinople), John III (Alexandria), Elias I (Jerusalem), Flavian II (Patriarch of Antioch)

307- Peter's chair vacant after the martyrdom of Pope Marcellinus by Diocletian in 304, Peter I (Alexandria), Tyrannus (Antioch)

107- Pope Alexander I (martryd by Trajan), Primus (Alexandria), Heron (Antioch)

Church in Rome established by Peter and Paul (the Apostles), Alexandria by Mark (the Apostle), Antioch by Peter (the Apostle).

Cardinal John Henry Newman, (prominant 18th century Anglican bishop and Catholic convert) had this to say after spending many years studying and wrestling with Christian history.

"And this one thing is certain... the Christianity of history is not Protestantism. If there ever were a safe truth, it is this. And Pretestantism has ever felt it so... This is shown in the determination... of dispensing with historical Christianity althoghter, and of forming a Christianity from the Bible alone: men never would have put it [historical Christianity] aside, unless they had despaired of it... To be deep in history is to cease to be Protestant."

Exotic Dancer Injured

2007-10-10T10:37:00.000-07:00

And I thought my job was dangerous!

Glad we don't have Fire Poles in my station.

Are you prejudice?

2007-10-10T07:42:00.000-07:00

When you see a headline like this United Auto Workers Union Sets Wednesday Morning Strike Deadline for Chrysler do you have an automatic/initial reaction or thought? Is that initial thought one of these two;
1-Good! I hope the union sticks it to those Chrysler jerks.
2-What a bunch of whiney jerks! I hope all those union guys lose their jobs.

If your initial reaction is one of those two, then you are prejudice either for or against organized labor.

I support the ideals of organized labor, but the manner in which labor unions excercise their power in this country is oftentimes stupid, immoral, and dishonest. The news report from the headline story reports that the average worker at Chrysler earns $75.86 per hour in wages, pension, and health care benefits. I believe this figure to be a mistake. It is a bad statistic designed to obfuscate. Let's look at some figures and then see if the numbers add up...

$75.86 = 157,788.80 per year assuming a 40 hour work week (that's the total compensation #)

$1,400 = a conservative (high) monthly health care package cost for a family of 5

$1,274.50 = a conservative (high) estimate of monthly pension contributions (15%) of wage (after FICA)

$132,000 = yearly take home (rounded down to nearest thousand)

That is a grossly inflated number, I suspect that the statistic ($75.86 per hour) includes ALL CHRYSLER "WORKERS" (e.g. the CEO, V.P.'s) and not just the hourly UAW wage earners on the line who the article is supposed to be about. I bet the actual number is about 3-4 times less than reported.

I think the media, (in this case FOXNEWS) is partisan and prejudiced against the union employees.

Keeping my brother off my back

2007-10-08T05:24:00.000-07:00

Columbus Day,

I just read this news report regarding a protest at a Columbus Day parade. I marvel at the different ideas and manifestations of protest you see in this country. Just yesterday we had the Life Chain, a protest against the continuing brutality against human babies in their mothers womb. This protest is done by simply standing silently on the side of the road with signs that affirm the position of life. Political conservatives don't make the news by throwing paint on other people's property. They don't block other people's ability to freely move from one location to another. Political conservatives don't trespass. They don't cloak themselves in the 1st Ammendment and then interrupt and shout down others in the act exercising their 1st ammendment rights. Isn't it ironic that political liberals claim the titles; lovers of peace and tolerance, defenders of the oppressed and marginalized, champions of human rights?

Back to Christopher Columbus... In keeping with his tradition of discovery and exploration; let's investigate the politics and history of the European discovery of the Americas. Let's go back through history and review the facts. I know that doesn't necessarily suit certain people's agendas... however, it suits mine.

Christopher Columbus (Cristoval Colon Spanish, Cristoforo Columbo Italian) was born in Genoa, or at least in Genoese territory in 1451, he died at Valladolid Spain in 1506. He developed a remarkable knowledge in Cosmography (mapping of the universe) and was an accomplished seaman and navigator by the 1460's (some records support the age of 14 but definately by the age of 19). He arrived in Portugal in the early 1470's and began to petition the King for support of the novel idea of sailing West to reach the Far East and the lucrative spice trade located there. He then went to Spain with the same idea and pitched that idea through various circles through the 1480's. Columbus was rejected by the King Ferdinand of Spain. This rejection stemmed from an unfavorable report from the Junta (commission) made up of Church and University leaders assigned to investigate the proposal. Remember that at the time King Ferdinand was busy pushing the Moors out of the Iberian Penninsula and was reluctant to divert his attention and resources to a risky scheme.

Coulumbus approached Henry VII of England to no avail and Charles VIII of France, but neither showed any interest. He returned to Spain to begin again with the Spanish Court. The Spanish were involved in one of the final acts of returning Spain completely to Christian rule, the Seige of Granada. This was in 1491. He was again rejected. Disheartened he began traveling on foot to Cordova. He stopped at a convent/monestary for the night. While there he told his story to the Prior... who just happened to be the personal confessor (the priest who is hears the confessions of and provides spiritual direction/advice) of Queen Isabella.

Columbus gained an audience with the Royal Court after gaining Queen Isabella's support. Isabella fronted Columbus money from her personal treasury (which was derived from ecclesiastical sources) in order for Columbus to present himself respectfully before the King. With the Queen, (who was advised by certain people in the Church) championing his cause, Columbus was awarded a contract in April of 1492. After receiving the Sacraments of Penance and the Holy Eucharist, the expidition left the port city of Palos on Aug 3, 1492. They sighted land (the Bahamas) at 2:00 AM on October 12, 1492.

He returned to Barcelona in March of 1493 and was received as a national hero. Spain was poor and the riches found in the new world were of great interest to the King and Queen. He made at least two return trips to the New World, colonies were established and Columbus and his sons were essentially the governors of the colonies. Then greed, abuse of power, and politics (not just Columbus', but the settler's also) resulted in Columbus and his sons being stripped of their offices and returned to Spain.

Obviously, the next several centuries resulted in the complete colonization of the America's. Independence from the European powers followed. Now it's 515 years later. What's the beef?
Here's the way I see it.

1. The persecution and enslavement of native people was nothing new to them, they had been doing it to eachother for centuries. Just like all human persons and cultures have done to each other in all geographic locations.

2. When technology and learning pass you by, you will be at a disadvantage. The Europeans arrived in a land that was undeveloped and only sparcely populated (relative to Europe, North Africa, Middle East, Persia, Asia). The natives were initially peaceful and welcomed the settlers.

3. A knowledge, technology, and development disparity will not long exist between human cultures. The strong will take advantage of their superiority and exploit it for their benefit. This happens in todays world politically, economically, intellectually, culturally, and militarily. That's just the way it is.

4. The native people's of North and South America are actually fortunate that it was European Christians and not people from the Muslim, or Far Eastern civilizations who "Discovered" America, becuase the brutality and subjugation that they now claim occured would have many times worse.

5. The people of the America's today, with native blood and ancestery, are much better off than they would have been if Columbus hadn't made that voyage in 1492. Especially those in the United States and Canada. Where else do you find the defeated and conquered able to maintain a degree of soveriegnty (the indian reservations) and with special rights (e.g. tax, fishing-hunting) simply becuase of your race?

6. And the single greatest thing the native peoples received from the Europeans who gave them an instant advancement in technology (of 3,000 - 5,000 years!!) was the truth of the Christian faith. Unfortunately, some of todays current Native Americans are rejecting that truth, (along with many others in our Post-Christian West) and reverting back to animism, shamanism, and other forms of paganism in a misguided attempt to return to what they romantically and naively have convinced themselves was a better and more peaceful time. Perhaps they'll start kidnapping each other again and enslaving one another. Will the Aztec and Mayan human sacrifice rituals start up again??

7. Happy Columbus Day!! Give thanks that the Christian West was first to settle the New World for I fear the World would be a much more dreary place if not for the influence of a strong, Europeanized North and South America.

Christopher Columbus, Queen Isabella, and King Ferdinand... visionaries who have made a positive difference for the world.

Peace Activists

2007-10-05T07:09:00.000-07:00

An American submarine pulls in to Halifax, Nova Scotia. Peace activists, the geniuses that they are, protest the presence of this "nuclear weapon" in their city. They make a case for it being dangerous to the people and the environment.

It's a nuclear reactor on a ship. It's a propulsion system. I think if they search their souls and start being honest, they will just admit that they hate the United States of America and any ship that came there would be a target of their ire.

It reminds me of when my submarine pulled in to Long Beach we were attacked by Greenpeace. I happened to be the Topside Petty Officer on duty, (I was in charge of security and access at the brow and I was armed with a .45). Two Greenpeace zodiacs and a Greenpeace helicopter suddenly appeared and were racing toward the boat. The had threatened in the paper that they were going to board our submarine and paint it red to symbolize the murder and death we represented. I called away "Repel Boarders" and sounded the alarm. Within 30-45 seconds there were 100 sailors topside armed with fire hoses, billy clubs, big wrenches, brooomsticks, mops, and several other people under me with shotguns and .45's. Greenpeace decided not to get to close. It was great.

Not sure if that was the last time a real live "repel boarders" was called on a U.S. Navy submarine (this was in 1989) but it isn't common.

This time it's Giuliani

2007-10-05T06:51:00.000-07:00

Making news recently was Archbishop Raymond Burke because he is reported as saying he would deny the Eucharist to a Catholic politician who persisted in the serious sin of supporting/promoting legalized abortion. His comments even became a hot topic on "The View" (here's a transcript). At least Rosy O. is gone so nothing stupid would be said about it...
r-i-g-h-t!!

It's funny to me how incensed people get when the Catholic Church exercises it's rights and sovereignty over it's own discipline and governance.

My Brothers Three Cents Worth

2007-09-26T18:55:00.000-07:00

The following is the letter which my brother wrote. He sent it to several of the big liberal papers, (Seattle P.I. N.Y. Times...) but they probably won't give him the forum. I will however, for I am the AntiSophist!!

To the editor.
I have sat back observing the lead up to President Ahmadinejad speaking at Columbia University. I have watched, read, and listened to almost every argument both pro and con on this issue, and feel the need to add my two cents as well.

I would first like to describe myself as an independent conservative who holds disdain for many politicians in both parties. I would also like to say that I am pleasantly surprised to find my views in lockstep with J. Byron Holcomb from Bainbridge Island, WA. Who describes himself as “an ACLU liberal and proud of it” in his recent letter to the editor of the Seattle Post Intelligencer.

I am absolutely offended by Lee Bollinger, the president of Columbia University, wrongly spinning this into a freedom of speech issue, when it clearly is not. Mr. Holcomb was correct in his assessment that freedom of speech is a right granted in the U.S. Constitution to U.S. citizens. Notice I say, “granted” by the U.S. constitution not “guaranteed”.

This may be an unpalatable and inconvenient truth for some to hear, but listen well. Only by being protected and defended at the tip of a spear, and having the lifeblood of willing patriots nourishing it. Our U.S. Constitution is merely an inanimate scrap of old parchment and faded ink.

I have willingly served at the tip of that metaphorical spear. My wife as well as our three children and I have risked everything in defense of that document and our country. I will always stand ready to nourish it with my very life’s blood if required of me.

I am not a special person. I am not a hero. I don’t do it for thanks, money or fame. I do it because I am an American. There are many people like me who have chosen for innumerable reasons to be the defenders of this great nation and all her citizens. Our rights and freedoms are granted by the Constitution, but guaranteed by American patriots who serve in her defense

It is beyond my comprehension how the President of Columbia University can be so magnanimous, as to bestow these freedoms purchased with, and defended by the blood of patriots on President Ahmadinejad, while citing “freedom of speech”. This is one of the most contemptible acts I have ever witnessed.

I did not risk everything for President Ahmadinejad. I did it for you Lee Bollinger, and it was my pleasure.

It’s startling how the words of St.Thomas More from the 16th century still ring true today. “One of the greatest problems of our time is that many are schooled but few are educated”.

Lignarius Rex

Operation Iraqi Freedom Veteran

Breaking My Silence

2007-08-21T10:25:00.000-07:00

Rejoice oh world Rejoice. I have something new to procrastinate about, so I will be doing more blogging (instead of preparing for a promotional exam!).

I originally set out to blog about the recent Democratic debate where the subject of prayer was discussed. After reading through the comments from the candidates I decided that my blog would actually be on something different. Not that the Dems didn't have something stupid to say about prayer, just that they had nothing surprising to say. Basically they were asked if prayer could affect/prevent tragedy (9-11, Katrina...). In general they responded in the negative. Then several of them commented on how faith is important but personal and that they wouldn't be public about their personal faith when holding public office.

In my opinion their comments are illuminating of the simplistic way they believe/disbelieve in God and the supernatural. On one hand they were asked if prayer could be a preventative action. They didn't believe so and then they cited examples of recent disasters that occured in spite of prayer asking for the prevention of the disaster (Hurrican Katrina, family illness...). It is a mistake to look at what HAS HAPPENED when deciding if something has been prevented FROM HAPPENING. To draw an anology, billions of dollars every year are poured into fire prevention programs (e.g smoke alarm campaigns, family exit drills, cooking safety, fire codes, burn bans, home and commercial fire inspections...) yet it can never be quantified exactly how many fires were prevented from happening or how many deaths were averted. When was the last time you saw a newspaper headline that stated that "No Fire At Sears Last Evening Around 11:00 PM Thanks To Adherance To Fire Code". Every day dozens of fires don't occur due to prevention programs and activities. Also, the severity of fires that do happen are lessened due to preventative actions, such as a family escaping a home fire in the middle of the night because of properly working smoke alarms.

My point is this, perhaps Katrina would have been 20 times as destructive if all those prayers hadn't been offered up. Perhaps the family member who died was brought to saving faith through God's abundant grace through the intercessory prayer of the loved ones. Their Earthly life not being preserved is not nearly as important as their eternal life being spent in Heaven.

Why will Democrats pour billions of dollars and hours into secular/social prevention programs (e.g. fire prevention, suicide prevention, crime prevention, poverty prevention, unemployment programs) without ever really being able to quantify the actual prevention of negative events, and yet refuse to invest prayer into the prevention of the same? Or to at least not acknowledge the efficacy of preventative prayer, also known as lamentations or prayers of deliverance.

Do they actually believe in God? Are they afraid they will alienate the Democratic constituancy of athiests, agnostics, and alternative religionists if they admit to believing in God's sovereign power?

Scripture and history are full of examples of God's intercession. Read these accounts about the Battle of Lepanto (another account) for example.

Good Cop, Dumb Cop... errr Bad Cop

2007-06-01T06:43:00.000-07:00

O.K. One of my favorite lines from the movie "Full Metal Jacket" was when the Drill Instructor (R. Lee Ermey, who in my opinion deserved the Academy Award for his performance) told "Pyle" after finding his foot locker unlocked, ".... if it wasn't for #^*#* like you, there wouldn't be thieves in this world."

I just read a news story which relates the experience of a police officer who had his food messed with while going through a drive through while in uniform. Should a police officer be able to order food without having to worrry about it being messed with? absolutely! Would a prudent police officer order food from teenage fast food workers assuming that it wouldn't be messed with? Absolutely not!

I hope that the officer wins, it's a horrible thing to have your sandwich spit in. Should a police officer be able to order food without having to worry about spit or worse being put in his food? YES!! That being said, there's a distinct difference between wishful thinking and reality. The reality is that cops can't have a reasonable expectation of receiving uncontaminated food going through a drive thru.

Pyro

A Story That Bears Watching: Follow Up

2007-06-01T06:39:00.000-07:00

The National Catholic Register, a weekly periodical, published an interview with Dr. Beckwith in it's latest issue. In it, Dr. Beckwith illuminates some of the story of his conversion and talks about some of the reactions to his conversion. Especially interesting to me are the things he says about the people who convert from one side to another within the different Christian traditions (he basically expressed an idea similar to the one I made in the first blog article I wrote regarding this topic... yea for me!). And his opinion on what Catholics have to learn and gain from Evangelical Christians, namely better and more dynamic preaching in the Parishes.

Pyro.

The Battle

2007-05-30T21:10:00.000-07:00

I just read this article and I think all good Christians (Catholics, Orthodox, and Protestants) should read it also. If you are Episcopalian it may be a tough read. But I don't think the focus should be on the specific tradition (Episcopalian) that the article is about. All of Christendom has examples of fifth columnists making life Hell for sincere believers. That said, What are those people thinking? Why can't liberals (or conservatives for that matter) use their religion to inform their politics and not the other way around?

Pyro

A story that bears watching

2007-05-18T09:47:00.000-07:00

I have been following a conversion story through alternative information media (AIM) on the internet for the past few weeks. Dr. Francis Beckwith, the president of the Evangelical Theological Society (ETS), converted and entered into full communion in the Catholic Church. There have been some understandable, yet unfortunate, uncharitable dissertations regarding Dr. Beckwith since his announcement. These were done by well intentioned Evangelicals who were probably offended and felt betrayed by Dr. Beckwith's conversion, which to them is incomprehensible. Some were also done by gloating Catholics who were uncharitably reveling in triumphalism. However, there have also been many charitable expressions regarding his conversion from evangelicals and Catholics alike.

There is a letter in the Wall Street Journal from a former collegue in the ETS that provides a fine example of charity. Also, the ETS released a statement regarding the situation that calmly expresses their thoughts without being uncharitable. The Wall Street Journal letter points to the fact that there have been a growing number of high profile conversions by people from the evangelical tradition to Catholicism since the mid 1960's. This is possibly due to the emphasis on ecumanism promulgated by the Second Vatican Council.

Converting from one Christian tradition to another is a two way street. The process of converting and the impetus behind them differ dramatically in my opinion. From what I have witnessed, Catholics who convert to newer traditions of Christian expression (e.g Calvanism, Lutheranism, Pentacostalism, Evangelicalism) do so out of ignorance born from an indifferentism towards their spiritual life prior to their conversion. Practicing the faith and living a committed spiritual life in Christ was not an important or consistent part of their family life. Because of this, they never learned the reasons, facts, and explanations for Catholic theological beliefs. They did however learn many basic core Christian beliefs; e.g. the existence of God as a Trinity, the death and resurrection of Jesus, the inspiration and truth of Sacred Scripture. When these Catholics then begin to desire to become serious in the spiritual life, they are very often susceptable to being influenced by co-workers, friends, and romantic interests who grew up practicing a Christian faith expression in a Protestant tradition. Many of the things they are told by these people sound very familiar to them because of their Catholic upbringing. The theological conclusions end up being different because of the Protestant tradition of personal infallibility in Biblical interpretation and exegesis. These fallen away Catholics end up embracing doctrines such as; Sola Fide, Sola Scriptura, symbolic Communion, symbolic Baptism, total depravity. They also end up learning erroneous "facts" regarding the Catholic faith.

The Protestant converts to the Catholic Church are very much the opposite. They come from a wide variety of Christian Traditions, (e.g. Lutheran, Prysbeterian, Assembly of God, Baptist.) And they convert though they were very knowledgable of what their tradition taught. Their impetus is usually that they honestly read Scripture with a desire to closely follow Scripture and understand the Christian faith as it was passed on by Jesus to the Apostles, and from the Apostles to the Church Fathers, and so on... and they discovered that the Catholic Church is indeed the Church that Christ founded.

Summary: Most Catholics who convert to Protestantism were very ignorant of what the Catholic Church actually professes. They then fill in this ignorance with erroneous beliefs regarding the Catholic Church and they embrace false theological beliefs born of the Protestant tradition. Most Protestants who convert to the Catholic Church were very knowledgable of what their church professed. They were however honest enough to look at all traditions of Christianity with a critical eye. And being docile to the Holy Spirit, they were able to embrace the Catholic Church with the knowledge that within it subsists the fullness of God's revelation.

I am an example of both; going from lax indifferent Catholicism, to becoming a committed Protestant; (jumping between several non-denominational/evangelical traditions, Methodistism, and Lutheranism), and finally returning to the Catholic Church after honestly and vigorously studying Scripture, theology, and Chistian history.

Pyro

"Catholic" politicians

2007-05-17T09:41:00.000-07:00

By now everyone has probably heard of the letter that Connecticut's 3rd Dist. Rep Rosa DeLauro and 17 other "Catholic" politicians published chastising Pope Benedict XVI for his statements/teaching regarding pro-abortion behavior of Catholic politicians.

What a crock!! Rep. deLaura didn't seem to mind trotting out the teachings of the Church when it concurs with her to pursuit of a social agenda such as workers rights.

Representative DeLauro suffers from a serious condition called sin. We all do. Her sin is public and heinous. Thankfully most of mine are private. Her letter is the epitome of irony however. I guess in her mind the seperation of church and state is like one of those turnstyles at the entrance to a stadium; a unidirectional impediment.

Here is what one priest had to say about this "statement".

Pyro

Statistics are like a bikini

2007-05-11T06:49:00.000-07:00

One of my favorite quotes is this: Statistics are like bikinis, what they reveal is intriguing, what they cover up is essential.

There has been a recent news report that the divorce rate is down. Before those of you who hold marriage as a sacred institution start jumping up and down with joy, read the link. It appears that divorce is indeed down, but not really because fewer marriages are ending in divorce. Fewer people are getting married.

A recent study also shows that stagecoach robberies are down in the United States and Viking raids have stopped on the British isles. Local politicians have been quick to take credit for both.

Pyro

King Herod's Tomb

2007-05-08T10:07:00.000-07:00

King Herod, that wonderful man who murdered thousands of innocent children in an attempt to get rid of a reported rival to his throne, has been found! At least his tomb has reportedly been found.

Here's my prediction; there will be some type of incredible revelation with this new archeological evidence that refutes Christ. This new information will be touted by Christianity's detractors as absolute fact. The media outlets will all run with this information and wonder for us what will happen to Christians now that their beliefs have been proved wrong.

My only question is if the media will wait until Christmas to bring all this up, or will they do it around one of the less known Holy Days such as Pentacost, the Feast of the Assumption, or the Feast of the Immaculate Conception.

Pyro

It's O'Bama!!

2007-05-03T22:11:00.000-07:00

I knew there was something I liked about this guy! This is about the only thing however.

Pyro

It's here!

2007-05-03T09:57:00.000-07:00

My new Notebook just arrived!

I apoligize to all free workers everywhere. I see that the box declares that my new HP laptop is a product of China.

oh well,...

Pyro

Zero Tolerance

2007-05-03T09:24:00.000-07:00

A conversation with a relative this morning got me thinking. Most schools have a zero tolerance for violence policy. What that means is that any violent act (fighting, wrestling, puching, kicking, assault) will get you expelled from school. No contingency exists which allows for defense of self or others. You strike someone, you're out!

Traditional Christian moral philosophy, best expressed by the Catholic Church in which subsists the fullness of God's revelation to man, says this about the legitimate use of force.

From the Catechism:
Legitimate defense
2263 The legitimate defense of persons and societies is not an exception to the prohibition against the murder of the innocent that constitutes intentional killing. "The act of self-defense can have a double effect: the preservation of one's own life; and the killing of the aggressor. . . . The one is intended, the other is not."65
2264 Love toward oneself remains a fundamental principle of morality. Therefore it is legitimate to insist on respect for one's own right to life. Someone who defends his life is not guilty of murder even if he is forced to deal his aggressor a lethal blow:
If a man in self-defense uses more than necessary violence, it will be unlawful: whereas if he repels force with moderation, his defense will be lawful. . . . Nor is it necessary for salvation that a man omit the act of moderate self-defense to avoid killing the other man, since one is bound to take more care of one's own life than of another's.66
2265 Legitimate defense can be not only a right but a grave duty for one who is responsible for the lives of others. The defense of the common good requires that an unjust aggressor be rendered unable to cause harm. For this reason, those who legitimately hold authority also have the right to use arms to repel aggressors against the civil community entrusted to their responsibility.
2266 The efforts of the state to curb the spread of behavior harmful to people's rights and to the basic rules of civil society correspond to the requirement of safeguarding the common good. Legitimate public authority has the right and duty to inflict punishment proportionate to the gravity of the offense. Punishment has the primary aim of redressing the disorder introduced by the offense. When it is willingly accepted by the guilty party, it assumes the value of expiation. Punishment then, in addition to defending public order and protecting people's safety, has a medicinal purpose: as far as possible, it must contribute to the correction of the guilty party.67
2267 Assuming that the guilty party's identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor.
If, however, non-lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people's safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means, as these are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the common good and more in conformity to the dignity of the human person.
Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state has for effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm - without definitely taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself - the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity "are very rare, if not practically nonexistent."68

I think zero tolerance policies are the cowards way out of using logic and reason when faced with the necessity of making a judgment of a situation. This cowards way out is probably the result of the litigation industry (attorneys) and their pursuit of money instead of justice. It is immoral and unjust to punish someone for excercising their right to defend themselves or another innocent party in the face of an assault.

I also wonder how much "zero tolerance policies" and the refusal to use corporal punishment in schools has contributed to the increase of violence in our society? If there were real and understandable reprecussions to misbehavior for students in K-8 (getting a spanking), would there be the amount of lethal violence in our schools? Why have things like Columbine and Virginia Tech started to happen?

Pyro

"It Didn't Happen Here"

2007-05-01T08:05:00.000-07:00

This would be a good read. It talks about why Socialism never got the strong base here in the United States that it has in European Democracies. Of particular interest to me was the influence of both Catholic social doctrine, Protestant cultural tendencies, and the influence of Organized Labor.

(Excerpt from the Hoover Institution www.hoover.org)

Seymour Martin Lipset and Gary Marks.It Didn’t Happen Here: Why SocialismFailed in the United States.W. W. Norton & Company. 379 pages. $26.95

Socialism is fading throughout the Western world. In Germany, after two decades of immobility by the centrist Christian Democrats, taxes have now been reduced substantially by a Social Democratic government. In Australia and New Zealand, where conservative governments long pursued interventionist policies and left economies wracked by inflation, labor parties now apply neoliberal market principles. According to Seymour Martin Lipset and Gary Marks, the greatest ideological distance has been traveled by the Labour Party in Britain, whose leader, Prime Minister Tony Blair, stated in an interview that his administration would "leave British law the most restrictive on trade unionism in the Western world."

While the death knell sounds for socialist theories, it may be timely to consider again the old question of why the United States never experienced a socialist movement with the strength and durability of those in Europe or the revolutionary force of those elsewhere in the world. Lipset and Marks revisit this topic in their fine new book, It Didn’t Happen Here: Why Socialism Failed in the United States.

At first, socialists turned a hopeful eye to American shores. After all, by the late nineteenth century the United States had the most advanced capitalist economy in the world. Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels and other socialist thinkers believed that a mature capitalist society would produce contradictions that would compel workers into a socialist mass movement. As we know, it soon became apparent that capitalism was not headed into collapse. The increasing mechanization of industry did not deprive businessmen of the surplus value "expropriated" from their laborers; rather, it created enormous windfalls, and at the same time made goods available to a broader proportion of the population than ever before.

Still, the American working class was not without grievances. As Lipset and Marks tell it, the Socialist Party of America did find limited popular support in the first decades after its founding in 1901. But the party achieved its very circumscribed success by maintaining its distance from European socialism and, instead, by laying claim to distinctively American values.

Much credit for the early success of the Socialist Party is due to its smart and charismatic leader, Eugene Victor Debs of Indiana, who first gained prominence organizing railway workers. In the 1912 presidential election, with Debs as their candidate, the Socialists received almost a million votes. They also did well in 1920, while Debs was in an Atlanta federal prison, serving time on a sedition conviction for speaking against the 1918 war bond drive. Popular outcry eventually led Republican Warren Harding to release Debs from prison. Throughout his career, Debs portrayed himself as a victim of government repression and capitalized on the American tradition of sympathy for free speech and hostility to the state.

Few socialists found their way into Congress, the most notable of these being Victor Berger, elected many times from Milwaukee, and Meyer London from Manhattan’s Lower East Side. Numerous cities, however, elected socialist mayors. Mayors Daniel Hoan in Milwaukee and Jasper McLevy in Bridgeport, Conn., were both longstanding Socialist Party members. The populations that repeatedly elected these men were not a stereotypical propertyless proletariat. The workers in these cities were homeowners and civic participants — members of unions and fraternal and life insurance societies.

In another contrast to European-style socialism, low taxes were a major plank in successful Socialist Party platforms. In Milwaukee, according to Lipset and Marks "[p]roperty taxes under successive socialist mayors from 1910 to 1940 were actually lower than in the period before and after their administrations." Socialist-led municipalities placed a strong emphasis on fiscal restraint and efficiency and on eliminating corruption. They often had the full support of the business community in addition to homeowning workers. Victor Berger, the leading socialist in Milwaukee, emphasized the consonance of socialist ideas with those of the American Founders, declaring in 1905: "Friedrich Engels once said: ‘Give every citizen a good rifle and fifty cartridges and you have the best guarantee for the liberty of the people.’ Thomas Jefferson held the same views exactly."

Lipset and marks provide an important analysis of the early American union movement, one which goes far in explaining the failure of European socialism to win adherents in the United States. In a section entitled "American Antistatism and Labor," the authors argue that the American labor movement long opposed programs that would have extended the role of the government. The reasoning behind this attitude, expressed eloquently by labor leader Samuel Gompers, was that the state would be far less likely to protect the American worker than to serve the interests of his corporate masters. Gompers was a London-born cigar maker who emigrated to New York in 1863. He was president of the American Federation of Labor (AFL) from 1886 until 1923 (except for 1895, after he was defeated by a Socialist Party candidate). Gompers advocated "the wage-earners doing for themselves what they can toward working out their own salvation," massing their own collective power against the power of the industrialists, without the intervention of the state. The authors note that "the AFL was opposed to state provision of old-age pensions, compulsory health insurance, minimum wage legislation, and unemployment compensation, and from 1914 on was against legislating minimum hours for men." Quoting historian David DeLeon, they argue that "‘Social democracy, communism, and other relatively authoritarian movements that rely upon coercive centers of state power’ have run against deep libertarian currents in American culture and as a result have never succeeded in developing deep roots."

The size and diversity of America’s immigrant population presented further obstacles, cultural and organizational, to the American socialist movement. Lipset and Marks report that by the mid-nineteenth century, only one-fifth of wage earners in the United States had native white parents, and almost three-fifths were of immigrant origin. The labor force in the United States soon became the most ethnically heterogeneous in the world, they state, and by 1930 "roughly one-third of the total population was of foreign stock." Seeking to explain "why the party failed to gain the allegiance of the poorest, most vulnerable sections of the population," Lipset and Marks point to the difficulties of uniting immigrants of different languages and cultures — populations which competed for jobs and whose ethnic animosities were often encouraged by employers and politicians. Studies have shown that immigrants were far more likely to look to their own people than to a political movement for help with their immediate needs and long-term security. Jewish and Catholic immigrants created flourishing voluntary and fraternal societies that provided social services and health, unemployment, and life insurance. Fraternal life insurance companies had 8.5 million members by 1910; more wage earners were members of fraternal societies than of labor unions. The proliferation of voluntary associations among Jewish, Italian, and Slavic immigrants in cities like Chicago and New York amazed reformers.

Moreover, the traditions immigrants brought from the old world were often hostile to socialist aims. Lipset and Marks point particularly to resistance to socialism among immigrants from Catholic countries. Political observers were already commenting on this phenomenon in the years before Word War I. Lipset and Marks cite British author G.D.H. Cole, who wrote, "the growing political strength of Catholicism was of great influence in keeping the Trade Unions aloof from any movement wearing a socialist label or ‘tainted’ with class war doctrine or materialist philosophy of action." Lipset and Marks argue that while Catholic leaders in the United States endorsed trade unionism, they repeatedly attacked socialism and pronounced the sanctity of private property. In doing so, they followed the lead of the Vatican, which condemned socialism in the papal encyclicals of 1891 and 1903. Archbishop Sebastian Messmer of Milwaukee did not transgress the bounds of his authority in declaring that "the private ownership of property is supported by the gospel apostolic teaching, and the rules of the Church, and is a divine ordination, not to be changed by the hand of man. . . . A man cannot be a Catholic and a Socialist."

As the proportion of Catholic workers grew, the American Catholic church also had direct influence over the political leanings of the labor movement. Church leaders urged the American Federation of Labor to adhere to Catholic social views and to eshew political remedies in favor of "pure and simple" trade unionism. They were persuasive. Lipset and Marks write that "Samuel Gompers, although a Jew, worked hard to convince Catholic church leaders that he was sympathetic to their outlook."

This analysis contrasts with the traditional linking of capitalism and bourgeois democracy with the Protestant faith, an association that arises from Max Weber’s original formulation in The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. Lipset and Marks argue the opposite: that there is a strong correlation between capitalism and Catholicism. They point out that "in Germany, socialism flourished primarily in the Protestant areas in the east, e.g., Prussia, while in western Germany, the Catholic Church, as in Latin Europe, repeatedly condemned atheistic materialistic socialism and weakened the appeal of the Social Democratic party." Recent studies have demonstrated that Catholic immigrants were longtime supporters of the liberal parties in England, Canada, and Australia, and the U. S. Democratic Party. As these parties strayed from principles of individual liberty, sound money, parental rights, and voluntarism, however, Catholics moved to the parties that newly espoused them, as the Republican party has done since the New Deal. Lipset and Marks do, however, lay at Protestantism’s feet another trait that repeatedly bedeviled the American Socialist Party — a tendency towards sectarianism, doctrinal wrangling, and schism.

Lipset and Marks thus demonstrate how homegrown traditions of mistrust of state power and respect for private property interacted with the attitudes of immigrant populations to deny European theorists’ dreams of a socialist America. They give credit to American affluence and social mobility. They lay out the reasons why the significant labor unrest of the years surrounding the turn of the century was not often expressed in political terms. And they point to structural features, foremost among them our two-party system, that made it difficult for the Socialist Party to gain a political foothold. It is by this close attention to historical circumstance, as well as a grasp of broad cultural features, that Lipset and Marks make an important contribution to a discussion that has been marred by overgeneralizations on one side of the political spectrum and bitterness and self-delusion on the other.

Pyro

May Day?

2007-05-01T06:37:00.000-07:00

Today is the feast of St. Joseph the Worker.

Pope Pius XII hoped that this feast (established 1955) would accentuate the dignity of labor and would bring a spiritual dimension to labor unions. May 1st had been designated by communists as the day to celebrate the international solidarity of workers. Communism, and Capitalism to a certain degree, both lack truly benevolent behavior towards workers. Not that there aren't scattered examples of workers being treated well. The Church has put much effort in to combatting this attitude towards laborers. in 1891 Pope Leo XIII wrote his ground breaking Encyclical Rerum Novarum (On Capital and Labor). This Encyclical was instrumental in providing the moral impetus in changing the way laborers and industrialists related and how governments in the West finally took action to protect the lives and wellbeing of the workers.With Quadragesimo Anno in 1931 Pope Pius XI built on Rerum Novarum in pointing a way for us to establish a more just society in light of the changing political and industrial landscape of the times. With Laborem Exercens John Paul II further developed the thoughts of the previous Encylicals and applied them to the present day in order to address technological advances and failures of society in practicing the behaviors encouraged in the previous documents. In Centesimus Annus (On the Hundredth Anniversary of Rerum Novarum) John Paul II honored the 100th anniversary of Rerum Novarum by pointing out successes over the last 100 years and advances in the development of a more just society in relation to human labor. He also synthesised the thoughts of all the previous documents in pointing out needs of the present day and the future.

It's a lot of reading to make it through all those documents. But it would be very rewarding. It's often said that Pope John Paul II, Ronald Reagan, and Margaret Thatcher were instrumental in the downfall of Communism in Eastern Europe. Most of you could probably say what Reagan and Thatcher did to bring down the Iron Curtain. But you'd be hard pressed to describe what John Paul the Great did. Read these documents, then imagine a man who embodied the virtues put to paper and emboldened others to do the same. Half a billion people were freed from Communism without armed conflict. That's a miracle.

Thanks and honor to St. Joseph, Patron of Workers, who through the love of God the Father, the grace of God the Son, and the power of the God the Spirit confers God's blessings upon us in the Communion of Saints.

Pyro

Rosie O'donnell and the Supremes

2007-04-26T13:08:00.000-07:00

The United States Supreme Court recently ruled on a case that upheld the law passed by the United States Congress and signed into law by the President of the United States outlawing partial birth abortions (THIS LINK IS TO A PICTURE OF A PARTIAL BIRTH ABORTION, VERY VERY GRAPHIC AND MONSTROUS). For those of you not familiar with how the United States government is designed to operate, this is a fine example of all branches of the government doing exactly, and only what their job description calls for.

Some people are upset about the ruling of the Court. The court was split with the decision being only a 5-4 majority. All five of the justices in the majority happen to be Catholic. Here is an article that discusses the decision through a legal lense. Unfortunately, the second page of the article is missing.

The point I would like to make is this; Catholic politicians who support the pro-abortion movement are all sophists. It's easy for us to determine the truth not by what's defended as being authentically Catholic, but by what's never attacked based on it being authentically Catholic.

Here are examples to illuminate my point;

The Supreme Court ruled that a law passed by Congress and signed by the President wasn't unconstitutuional. Enemies of the decision rightly recognize that the authentic Catholic moral teaching is that abortion is wrong. The five Supreme Court justices who were in the majority had an opinion that was consistant with authentic Catholic moral teaching. The Justices and their decision are being attacked based on the "Establishment Clause" of the Second Ammendment, AKA "The seperation of Church and State".
Everybody recognized the actions of the subjects (S.C. Justices) to be consistant with authentic Catholic Church teaching.

Congress doesn't pass a law (June 8, 1999 HR 1906) that would have prohibited the FDA from using federal funds for the testing, development, or approval . . . of any drug for the chemical inducement of abortion" (such as the RU-486 abortion pill). Nancy Pelosi (among many other Catholic (D's) vote against this. You heard no uproar decrying the vote of Madame Pelosi and other Catholics who voted with her as some type of violation of the "separation of Church and State".
Because everyone recognizes that their votes were totally inconsistant with authentic Catholic moral teaching.

What's my point? Well, I have two...
1. The only time people get upset about Catholic moral teaching is when it stands in opposition to the sinful lifestyle they want to lead, e.g. legalizing the murder of babies in the mothers womb, not paying workers a just wage or giving them reasonably safe working conditions, using artificial contraception to limit family size with no valid moral imperative, engaging in a homosexual lifestyle...

2. "Big Tent Catholics" or those Catholics who submit that their actions are justifiable because there is more than one valid Catholic position on certain moral issues are nothing but grown children trying to validate and excuse their misbehavior. Then they present themselves for Communion as if they are "worthy to receive..." and are incredulous when it's suggested they should be denied communion because of their actions for which they are unrepentant. All the while professing to be faithful Catholics. The fact that nobody attacks them for being Catholic or for allowing their Catholic beliefs to overly influence their public actions when they do things such as vote against banning partial birth abortions speaks volumes. The silence is deafening.

Pyro

Sheryl Crow, Can You Spare a Square?

2007-04-25T07:20:00.000-07:00

This is gonna be short and sweet. It has been reported over the last week that Sheryl is encouraging everyone to cut back on their toilet paper usage. I suspect this is to save on the environmental impact of manufacturing and disposing of toilet paper/bathroom tissue. Sheryl said this, "I think we are an industrious enough people that we can make it work with only one square per restroom visit, except, of course, on those pesky occasions where two to three could be required."

Now, I commend her on the motive behind her proposal. Without getting in to what my late Grandmother termed "barn talk" I say this to Sheryl. I'm a man, you are not. I have hair on my... chest, you do not. Don't tell me what I should do until you've... walked a mile in my shoes.

It's stupid statements like Sheryl's that cause clear thinking people to discount everything they hear coming from celebrities.

Pyro

Chuck Colson on the Tolerance Double Standard

2007-04-25T07:09:00.000-07:00

I just read this column and found it disturbing. I'm not sure if I believe some of the "facts" however. Not that I think Chuck is being dishonest, I would suspect that his sources aren't accurate. I am specifically thinking here of the report that parents weren't allowed to pull their children from class when the topic was on a subject that is held by the parents, due to their religous beliefs, to be immoral. But hey, perhaps I'm naive.

Pyro

Champions of Faith

2007-04-25T06:48:00.000-07:00

I'm about 2 weeks "late" posting this.

If you love baseball, get this DVD. If you love sports, get this DVD. Or if you just love how God can work in everday peoples lives, (or in the case of millionare professional athletes; how God works in peoples lives everyday), buy this DVD.

You'll probably hear some cynical people postulate that the players featured in this DVD (and they are some BIG name players) are only chasing a buck. Some will be watching and waiting for them to do something bad (sin) and cry out, "see, they weren't sincere!" I don't feel that way. I think they are folks just like you and I who have the resources available to produce something big that people will watch because of their celebrity status. I think there intent is pure. If they do slip up and sin, as we all do, it only proves that they're fallen humans. They just have the added pressure of being in the public eye. Imagine if you had news cameras on you the entire time you worked.

Anyway... Watch the DVD's, it will be a blessing.

Pyro

Global Warming

2007-04-24T19:35:00.000-07:00

So what gives with this Global Warming stuff. I keep waiting to turn my furnace off for the year and then this stuff keeps happening.

I'll tell you what I think is an inconvenient truth. That this has been one of the coldest and snowiest winters in many many years.

Not that I doubt the scientists and and politicians, I just don't trust them.

Pyro

Pagan Rejoice

2007-04-23T16:31:00.000-07:00

Followers of Wicca have won their case and will now be able to have their Wiccan Pentacle (pentagram) engraved on their tombstones in the national cemeteries. It seems kind of odd to me however because I thought Wiccan's (aren't they the new age druids/witches/nature worshipers) would burn their dead in a funeral pyre like in the old days of Viking and Celtic history.

Oh well... maybe they'll fight for the funeral pyres next.

Pyro

Tom Cruise, Lover of Firefighters?

2007-04-19T16:39:00.000-07:00

Tom will be in New York tonight "helping" FDNY firefighters who worked at ground zero to "detox".

Now, as a Christian I have obvious disagreements with the philosophy and beliefs of scientology. But also, as a Christian and an American I don't believe that a person should be prevented from offering to help people in need of help. That said, the firefighters union (International Association of Fire Fighters), the FDNY administration, and the city government should make sure that the individual firefighters are not being preyed upon and taken advantage of in their time of need.

I don't want to rush to judgement as to the sincerity of Tom Cruise and the Scientologists who are there putting on the event. But if they are being dishonest then I hope those previously mentioned organizations do their jobs and discredit Tom, Scientology, and take the appropriate legal action. Who knows, Tom's next movie may be jailhouse theatre.

Pyro

The Wheels of Justice

2007-04-19T10:46:00.000-07:00

I'm a big fan of St. Thomas More (Sir Thomas More for those who don't believe in the Communion of Saints), so maybe that's why modern day attorneys and our justice system usually make me want to vomit.

Everybody who commits a crime ends up with a lawyer who attempts to have their client excused from justice due to circumstances beyond the clients control. Usually the defended is painted as some sort of poor helpless victim who no longer has a free will or is otherwise unable to be held responsible for his or her actions. Such is the case with the pastors wife being tried for murdering her husband.

Some of the things that she claims happened to her may very well be true. Does that mean that she can't be held accountable for her actions? What if she had gone and shoplifted? If you are treated poorly does that mean that you have license to do whatever you want?

Justice systems in Western society have become an industry. We need a philosophical return to the belief that Justice is the administration of deserved punishment or reward.

Pyro

Remember the tomb of Jesus?

2007-04-16T17:16:00.000-07:00

Remember a month or so ago when James Cameron of "Titanic" fame had this high publicity "documentary" on the Discovery channel where the burial tomb of Jesus and his family had been discovered. Jesus' "wife" Mary Magdalene was there with him of course...

Well, it seems that a bunch of the rats are jumping ship and the whole thing is being debunked by the very scientists who went on t.v. raving about the discovery.

Just goes to show that advertising money will tempt otherwise good networks to put out shotty work just in time for Christian Holy seasons like Lent, the Triduum, Advent, and Christmas. Now, where are all the anti-muslim programs during their holy days? I guess t.v. executives are just a bunch of cowardly bullies. Slap a Christian and you get the other cheek. Slap a Muslim and your house gets burned down, if your lucky.

School Shooting

2007-04-16T09:48:00.000-07:00

A terrble tragedy at Virgina Tech results in dozens dead and dozens seriously injured.

What will come of it? I'm not sure but I suspect what we'll hear is all the usual suspects getting up on soap boxes and banging on drums. The "guns kill people" crowd will use it as yet another example of why all guns should be outlawed. The NRA people will remind everyone that someone had to pull the trigger. The shooter will turn out to be either; a spurned and/or abused homosexual, a pissed of member of a love triangle, a person who couldn't handle some bad grades, a "radical Muslim extremist", a rejected applicant to the school.

It sounds like a scene from one of Clancy's books where the terrorsists start attack poorly defended and high population targets like shopping malls.

Whatever the story ends up being there are 22 (as of right now [1000 hrs]) people senselessly murdered and thousands of lives forever scarred. Sin is a terrible thing.

I pray for the repose of their souls and for the families that are left here to suffer the loss.

Open -vs- Closed Communion

2007-03-27T06:30:00.000-07:00

I recently had a story relayed to me that I haven't been able to shake from the front, or at least from near the front, of my mind. A man who is a fallen away Catholic recently experienced the death of his father. The man, his wife, and son attend a traditional style Presbyterian church. His father had remained Catholic and the family had a funeral Mass per the father's wishes. The man, his wife, and their two children attended the Mass. When it came time for Communion they all presented themselves for reception of the Eucharist, notwithstanding the explanation from the priest as to who is welcome, (and who isn't welcome) to receive Communion. The priest also explianed that those who were not eligible to receive Communion could present themselves for a blessing by standing in front of the priest with their arms crossed in front of their chest.

The man describes what his two children, (an early 20's daughter and teenage son), experienced when presenting themselves. The daughter, (I don't know what her religious profession is, but I know it isn't Catholic) presented herself for reception of the Eucharist. The priest proclaims, "the Body of Christ", to which she replies with silence. The two have an awkward several seconds which ends with the priest asking, "are you Catholic?". The daughter replies, "no". The priest then touches her shoulder and moves her on so the next person in line can have their turn.

The son then presents himself, again awkwardness. The son actually is given communion but fumbles with the Host and at the chalice when receiving Christ's precious blood. The Dad and Mom were upset with how their daughter was treated and thought the awkwardness of their teenage son and the fumbling was mostly humerous. They both also received communion.

What this whole story drove home for me is how ignorant people are about what different Christian traditions profess and sadly what their own tradition professes, be they; born Protestant's, born Catholic's, fallen away Catholic's now Protestant, the non-Christians, the non-religious. People in the United States behave as if they are entitled to receive whatever they want. The ultimate authority is themselves. It's as if they say, "if what you say contradicts my viewpoint, then you are wrong and an idiot because I know better". They pick and choose what news agency to watch based on their political and social ideology (I'm guilty). And if told that they are not welcome to receive something that they believe they should be able to recieve, they behave as if they are being assaulted.

I wouldn't want to receive communion in a Church that was not Catholic, (ya ya, there's always the discussion of what "catholic" is but in this instance I mean Catholic) or that did not have a valid priesthood. Because without the valid priesthood you can believe all day long that the Eucharist is the body, blood, soul, and divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ, (and you'd be correct) but, the Eucharist only exists where there is a true priest (one ordained by someone who is a bishop in apostolic succesion). And if you believe in the true presence, (that's where the substance of the bread and wine cease to be bread and wine and are instead TRANSsubstantiated into the real body and blood of Christ) then to recieve communion where there isn't a true presence is tantamount to denying Christ or committing adultry.

For someone who only believes in the symbolic presence, there wouldn't be much to keep them from receiving the Eucharist in a church with Apostolic succession (Catholic and Orthodox), except for the desire to honor the customs of those communities. At best they would think that their Catholic and Orthodox cousins are simply too literal in their reading of Scripture. At worst they would think that their Catholic and Orthodox cousins are silly superstitious morons who go through their faith life on automatic pilot never giving anything theoligical a second thought. The fact that you are told that you are not welcome to receive communion because you aren't in communion is just mean and insensitive I guess.

Here's what is printed in the prayer books (misals) used by the congregation during Mass regarding the reception of Communion.

For our fellow Christians:
...Because Catholics believe that the celebration of the Eucharist is a sign of the reality of the oneness of faith, life and worship, members of those Churches with whom we are not yet fully united are ordinarily not admitted to holy Communion. Eucharistic sharing in exceptional circumstances by other Christians requires permission according to the directives of the diocesan bishop and the provisions of canon law (Canon 844, 4).
Members of the Orthodox Churches, the Assyrian Church of the East, and the Polish National Catholic Church are urged to respect the discipline of their own Churches. According to Roman Catholic discipline, the Code of Canon Law does not object to the reception of Communion by Christians of these Churches (844, 3).
For those not receiving holy Communion: All who are not receiving holy Communion are encourage to express in their hearts a prayerful desire for unity with the Lord Jesus and with one another.
For non-Christians: We also welcome to this celebration those who do not share our faith in Jesus Christ. While we cannot admit them to holy Communion, we ask them to offer their prayers for the peace and the unity of the human family.

Rock Creek Residential Design

2007-03-14T19:11:00.000-07:00

Hey, If you are in the market for a good value on a custom home design, check out this web site. It's from a friend of mine who started up a home business. He has been designing homes for years and finally decided that he should get paid to do it. There are at least a dozen people I know who live in a home, or had their home remodeled by him.

His business is called Rock Creek Residential Design. The link is...

www.rockcreekdesignonline.com

or click here Rock Creek Residential Design

Pyro

A tale of two protests

2007-03-11T11:47:00.000-07:00

So I've been taking part in a protest vigil outside of a local planned parenthood. This protest vigil coincides with the 40 days of lent. After the article ran in last Sunday's Kitsap Sun there were several letters to the editor promoting each viewpoint on the abortion debate. The paper then posts the letters in their blog site and people are free to comment on other peoples letters.

As a person who is pro-life, I have taken part in numerous anti-abortion protests. Every one of them has been peaceful, lawful, and quiet on the part of the protestors. Some times we say communal prayers out loud. Most of the time we just silently hold signs which read; "Adoption, the loving option", "Stop Abortion". "Choose Life", "Jesus Loves Children", "Pray for an end to abortion", you get the point. We 100% of the time stay on public property and do not impede any other persons ability to freely travel through our area. The worst things I have ever seen at one of these protests is when a passerby screams obscenities at us or even throw things at us. There have on rare occasions been police officers parked within our view, but they have always remained in their vehicles. We usually have a police car drive by during the course of the protest, probably because of some complaint called in to 911. We are protesting a law which has made the killing of children inside their mother's wombs legal. Over 3,500 of these killings occur every day in the United States!! We peacefully protest. Sometimes in silent prayer, other times praying out loud together as occurs in church.

Here is another protest story. There are a few people who believe that all war is wrong. And there are many people who believe that the United States' occupation of Iraq after invading them and overthrowing their brutal dictator is wrong. There are constant reports in the press of anti-war protests and rallies. I notice that a significant number of these protests involve protestors being arrested. They get arrested for blocking traffic, trespassing, assault... name something disorderly and they seem to get arrested for doing it. Here's a recent example from an ongoing protest in Tacoma. Around 3,500 American military members have been killed in the last 5 years during this war/occupation. That's around the same number that are killed every day because of legalized abortion. Why is it that when protestors are from the political left there are high rates of violence committed by the protestors, and when the protestors are from the political right there are very very rare instances of violence perpetrated by the protestors?

Pyro

Should I let the kids see that movie...

2007-03-10T07:50:00.000-08:00

How many times do parents ask themselves that question? Hopefully it happens several times a month. We live in an electronic culture and full length films and T.V. shows are often just a mouse click away, or even just an iPod away. Hopefully as parents, we scrutinize each show for it's moral and social value and weigh the possible impact it will have on our children before we let them watch something. This is not always easy as there are many obstacles to a parent diligently accomplishing this. I will go through some of the common challenges a parent will typically face and give some suggested ways to overcome them.

1. LAZINESS: This obstacle makes the supposition that on some level you understand that there are certain philosophies, subjects, uses of language, and human activities that children should not be exposed to. Laziness always comes with a payoff. The payoff for laziness is the serving of ones selfishness. The feeding of that desire to seek your own personal pleasure above even the welfare of your own children. In the movie decision realm, laziness is most often manifested in following manner and with this motivation be it conscious or unconscious; If I let the kids watch that movie... then I will be free to do what I want without being interrupted.
How to overcome laziness? Make the conscious, deliberate decision to take action. Laziness (sloth) always begins with a temptation. Fight the temptation by acting out the opposite virtue. Prudence in this instance is the opposite virtue, Prudence being: an intellectual habit enabling us to see in any given juncture of human affairs what is virtuous and what is not, and how to come at the one and avoid the other. Secular society recognizes this to a certain degree with it being manifested as follows. When confronted with the need to make a decision people are told to "make a list" of all the pros and cons of the decison. In todays society though one thing is left out, the fact that there is an objective right and wrong. So what's right is left up to the subjectiveness of the individual which can lead to quite a conundrum.
Bottom Line: practice prudence taking into account the objective nature of right and wrong.

2. IGNORANCE: This obstacle can be difficult to overcome. Ignorance is unfortunately a word that has been corrupted in our times. It is viewed as a synonym of stupid. It is not the same as stupid however, it simply means that you lack information or knowledge. Stupid would be if you had information and failed to act appropriately on it either because you were lazy or because you just couldn't apply the knowledge due to limited capacity to process thought. I don't believe there are many truly stupid people in this world. I do however believe that there are many ignorant ones, some are intentionally ignorant, some unintentionally, and others are manipulated into ignorance.
The only way to defeat ignorance is to get informed. The word informed is very important.
Inform: 1320, "to train or instruct in some specific subject," from L. informare "to shape, form, train, instruct, educate," from in- "into" + forma "form." Sense of "report facts or news" first recorded 1386. Informative "instructive" is from 1655. Informer "one who gives information against another" (especially in ref. to law-breaking) is from 1503.
Thus to defeat ignorance we must shape and train our minds through education. This is best done by studying from a source that recognizes the existance of an objective right and wrong in moral philosophy.

3. REBELLION: This is when the inmates run the prison, the sheep herd the shepherd, the tail wags the dog, the kid's dictate activities in the home. Our children, (and us parents) are fed a steady diet of new age psychobabble geared toward "building up" a childs self esteem. This is accomplished by encouraging democratic style decision making in the home where subjects are to be discussed ad-naseum. For decades we've been encouraged to only say positive things to our kids and redirect things away from the horrible absolutism that the word NO represents. Children need, and are happier with, well informed energetic parents who are decisive and fair. I read a recent report where the problems associated with being obsessed with oneself and the entitlement mentality that goes along with it has gone up dramitically over the past two decades. It was postulated that this was a result of the "self esteem building" philosophy that has taken over our education system is responsible for this.
Children are going to complain when they get told no. That's just the way it is. So what... life contains many opportunities to be disappointed. Why deprive our children of the education in how to handle disappointment appropriately? If they make a big production out of getting told no, (throwing a fit) then deal with appropriately by grounding them, giving them extra chores... whatever. The parents need to be in charge. If there's a power vacuum, it will get filled by someone.

I recommend this website for reviewing films. It will help you make the decision as to whether or not a film is appropriate for your children to watch.

Pyro

The College of William and Mary at Virginia

2007-03-06T21:25:00.000-08:00

Read a recent news article regarding a compromise on the display of a cross in the chapel at the university. The short story is that William and Mary (sorry for the Wikipedia link) took a cross down from where it has been displayed since 1940 in the campus chapel. There has probably been a much longer history with the cross or other similar religious display as the college was founded in 1693 with it's main thrust being a divinity school for the Anglican Church.

This whole situation seems to me to be a manufactured problem. Why would someone going into a chapel on a campus which has over a 300 year tradition of being affiliated with a christian church feel discriminated against due to finding a cross in the chapel? That would be like going to a Native American museum and complaining about all the "indian stuff" inside.

Somebody has an agenda, and the president of the college is either a co-conspirator or he lacks the backbone to stand up against troublemakers.

Pyro

level III sex offender at church

2007-03-04T10:03:00.000-08:00

This Lutheran church is having to make a big decision on what their actions should be. A level III sex offender is wanting to attend services for the stated reason that it will help him to get better.

What should they do? What is their obligation?

I think I lean toward allowing his attendance at the Sunday service. I would have some stipulations such as:

1. he would have to sit in the front row
2. he would not be allowed to talk with any children
3. he would have escorts assigned to him
4. he would be required to be in the presence of his escorts 100% of the time
5. he would be required to be escorted to and from his vehicle
6. he would have to show monthly proof to the pastor that he was actively receiving mental health treatment
7. he would have to agree to allow his computer to be picked up from his home at any time for the purpose of reviewing his internet activity
8. he would be required to provide/allow his phone records to be reviewed whenver requested

maybe I'm going overboard, but if he's sincere then these things shouldn't be a problem. And the offender can look at all these things as part of his penance for his sins

Pyro

"The rest of the story"

2007-03-02T23:36:00.000-08:00

It seems that Switzerland accidently invaded neighboring Liechtenstein

The funny thing to me however, (and it didn't get reported in the news), is that upon hearing the news, France immediately surrendered!

Pyro

Accountability

2007-03-02T20:16:00.000-08:00

With all the news about top officials going down in flames over the Walter Reed Scandal it causes me to wonder.

How many times over the last 10 or 15 years have these same problems been pointed out by lower level personnel? How many times have the grunts been told to "shut up" and quit complaining? How many times has someone had the idea to fix up the place or maintain things better only to be shut down or ignored? I see it happen all the time, whether it be in the military, a para-military organization (like fire departments or police departments), or regular corporate America.

The problem is simple, GOOD IDEAS HAVE RANK. If you aren't high enough in rank or seniority, your idea isn't good, it's whinning or making waves. If you are high enough in rank or seniority, all of your ideas are good, even the really really dumb ones!!

Now of course I'm being slightly sarcastic. There are good organizations all over the place. The thing they have in common is that they value everyone in the organization and recognize that the genesis of many good ideas is not from the top down but instead, from the bottom up.

Too bad the folks in the Army and at Walter Reed didn't see fit to do something about an obviously unsatisfactory condition until they got caught. I don't praise the news media very often, and Lord knows they will be circling this story like a bunch of vultures, but the Army deserves two black eyes over this one.

Pyro,

Reason #74,368,746,798,421,957,694,375,096 that labor unions are still necessary

2007-02-25T16:19:00.000-08:00

Teacher’s Trial Begins TodayBy Rusty Garrett
TIMES RECORD • RGARRETT@SWTIMES.COMA lawsuit over whether teachers should be paid for time spent monitoring students outside the classroom will go to trial today in Crawford County Circuit Court.Judge Mike Medlock will preside over the case filed by former Coleman Junior High School civics teacher Steve Jones against the Van Buren School District.The suit, originally filed in 2003, claims Jones and other teachers were not paid for non-instructional duty time that they were required to work. It has been certified as a class-action suit.A 2003 law requires teachers be paid additional compensation if they work more than 60 minutes of non-instructional time in a week. Lemley said there is a dispute over whether passing periods — the three to seven minutes between classes — and before and after school duty and lunch duty are noninstructional time.After the Van Buren School Board voted to fire Jones in 2006, the suit was amended to include a wrongful termination claim. Jones was fired for missing a meeting in 2005 and leaving a meeting early in 2006.The termination issue will be tried at a later date.Attempts between Jones’ attorney Brian Meadors and Kevin Lemley, the lawyer representing the school district, to negotiate a settlement ended Feb. 13 when the school board voted 6-0 against accepting an offer that would have involved a $400,000 payment by the district.Lemley told board members the plaintiffs have contended a decision in their favor could cost the district more than $2 million.The trial will begin at 9 a.m. in the new circuit courtroom in the remodeled county courthouse annex on Fourth Street.

I'm no huge fan of public school teacher unions but.... it sounds as if this school administration thinks it's o.k. to not pay workers for required hours of labor (meetings, training, whatever you want to call it). I'll bet all the salary employees claim "comp time" for these meetings and take extra 3 day weekends once they've banked enough!

Pyro

The Reason labor unions are their own worst enemy #1,992,883,575,884,888,548,848,584

2007-02-25T15:43:00.000-08:00

A 73-year-old man died of a heart attack in North London in January, perhaps assisted by a delay in responding by the London Ambulance Service. According to The Sun, the nearest crew could not be called because European Union labor rules prevent disturbing the crew for any reason during the first 20 minutes of their half-hour break. [The Sun (London), 1-6-07]

How much ya wanna bet this rule is already changed?
How much ya wanna bet there are people arguing that what happened wasn't wrong?

Pyro

Links

2007-02-24T20:52:00.000-08:00

I'm in the process of rebuilding my links that I lost when I had an "accident" while editing my blog. Here is a short explanation of each of the links:

1. Google; if you don't know what this is, you shouldn't be on the internet.
2. Catholic Exchange: a site that has news, articles, faith formation and such.
3. Mark Shea: An author who writes lots of short essays, full length books,
and runs a blog called Catholic and Enjoying it. He is an adult convert
from an Evangelical background.
4. Communio: A trade magazine for theologians. The who's who of theology
write for this including former Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger (Benedict XVI),
Hans Urs Von Balthazar, Hildebrand ... you get the drift.
5. EWTN: The largest Christian broadcasting entity in the world with 24/7
TV and radio.
6. National Fellowship of Catholic Men: site with things of interest
regarding living a faith filled life for men.
7. Our Lady Star of the Sea, Bremerton: My Church's website
8. Catholic Answers: Catholic apologetics site. Their radio program which
is broadcast on EWTN radio was instrumental in helping me to
understand the truths of the Catholic faith.
9. Coming Home Network: a site with lots of essays written by converts
where they describe their journeys from other Christian traditions, non
Christian religions, and even athiests. They also have a radio program on
EWTN called "The Journey Home". The site is run by a convert who used
to be a pastor in a Presbyterian church.
10. Official Vatican Website: lots of stuff at this English language site. You
can even read through everything that every Pope from the last couple of
hundred years has written.

More links to follow as I rebuild my list.

Pyro

Lenten Reflection

2007-02-24T16:01:00.000-08:00

So... I'm part of a group that is keeping a 40 day vigil during Lent on the sidewalk at a Planned Parenthood site. The vigil hours are from 8:00 AM till 8:00 PM. We had the typical responses from passing motorists which consist of; 5 honks and thumbs up for every 1 honk and middle finger/cursing. We even had a guy come up and give us all coffee and hot chocolate. My hour just happened to end at the same time that the Parish about 3 blocks away began Confessions. There was a nice handout that the priest gave that I will share with you here on my blog. Not sure where the reflection comes from, so I just want to give credit to whoever the unnamed source was.

Whatever Lenten practices we undertake, it is important to remember their purpose. Lenten practices are not about losing weight or finaly stopping smoking, but they are about deepening our baptismal identity as children of God and members of the Body of Christ. "If you are [children] of God"... this is the identity conferred upon us at baptism. This is the identity out of which we enter into our own Lenten desert. This is the identity out of which we face our own worst temptations. By rmaining faithful to who we are -- God's children, members of the Body of Christ -- we can resist temptations and grow in our relationships with God, self, and others.
Traditionally, Christian penance has always included three prongs: fasting, prayer, and almsgiving (charity). This suggests to us that penance isn't a matter of "giving up" something, nor is it a single act -- even if performed faithfully over a long period like forty days. Christian penance has as it's purpose genuine conversion of life, so that at the end of Lent when we renew our baptismal promises we are able to do so with full throat, well aware of our own wonderful identity as sons and daughters of God. The new life we celebrate at Easter cannot happen without our dying to ourselves, without our going to Jerusalem with Jesus and willingly embracing whatever death is in store for us. For that is the road to new life. That is the road we travel during Lent.

Have a blessed Lent

Pyro

Out of Hibernation

2007-02-23T06:43:00.000-08:00

Well, It's been quite some time since I consistently posted in my blog. I will be trying to get back in the habit of posting something every day. It takes a certain time commitment to keep a blog current and I stopped making the time to blog. Well, with Lent upon us I suddenly have some time back in my schedule and along with other things I'll be using some of it to blog more frequently.

I learned yesterday of a disturbing event in Sante Fe, New Mexico. Basically, it seems that an individual (or individuals) hid alarm clock/CD players in the Church which activated about halfway through the service on Ash Wednesday (a special Holy Day). The CD's played recordings of people cursing, swearing, and making sexually explicit sounds.

In my search for news stories or commentary regarding this incident I have been extremely underwhelmed. The perpetrators are referred to as "pranksters" and every story I could find had only bare bones facts. None of the in depth reporting or digging for information, as in the Anna Nichole Smith train wreck. If Her story had been treated the same way, this is all we would have seen; "Anna Nichole Smith died today after being transported by paramedics to an area hospital. Cause of death unknown. Anna Nichole is survived by her daughter and mother." I believe the cause of this indifference is a deep seated, somewhat unconscious prejudice/bigotry towards Christianity in general and the Catholic Church in particular by the main stream media (MSM).

Here are my questions:

1. If an ACLU, NAACP, GLBTA, or (insert organization that traditionally supports liberal politics) meeting was interrupted/disrupted in such an offensive manner what would the press coverage have been?

2. Interfering/obstructing a group from peaceably assembling is a civil rights violation isn't it(1st amendment)?

3. Denying a group from the free excercise of their religion violates their civil rights doesn't it (1st amendment)?

4. Is singling out a group based on their religion (this event occured at the Cathedral Church which is essentially the headquarters for Catholics in the region) and assaulting them or violating their civil rights considered a hate crime?

I won't hold my breath waiting for the ACLU to express their outrage over this incident.

Pyro

Oak Harbor State Champions

2006-12-03T08:03:00.000-08:00

Kyles first time being an Altar server

2006-12-01T18:01:00.000-08:00

2006-12-01T17:38:00.001-08:00

Katie Joke

Kate's joke. Not sure if it will post correctly

Oak Harbor defeats Gonzaga Prep

2006-12-01T16:47:00.000-08:00

Fake Noise?

2006-09-21T07:34:00.000-07:00

It has been reported that the Seahawks are using artificial crowd noise at Qwest field. Mike Holmgren did the right thing and used the situation to incite the Qwest field fans to be louder than ever.

I would love to be in that stadium on Sunday. Nationally televised game, rematch of a great game from last year, controversy, intrigue, and best of all; whiney New Yorkers filing official complaints about how loud it is at Qwest Field.

The Giant's players are going to look like a bunch of Pee Wee Hermans running around yelling, WHAAT? WHAAAAATTTT?

nice to hear

2006-09-21T07:31:00.000-07:00

This news story surprised me this morning. I wonder if the wrong people were killed. Or perhaps she is being punished for failing. Or maybe some reasonable people are actually starting to surface.

I screwed up

2006-09-19T13:28:00.000-07:00

somehow, while trying to fix a problem with the title to one of my posts, I erased all of my links and some other stuff from my profile. I will try to rebuild, but it may take some time.

Medical Ethics

2006-09-19T10:26:00.000-07:00

Don't be alarmed by the specific organ that was transplanted in this story. My question/comment has to do with the donor and the fact that they are in China.

I have a difficult time respecting the determination that this transplant was done ethically. First, because they say the organ was donated by a "brain dead" person. What does that mean? Was this person dead with the exception of them being on a heart/lung machine? Was he "brain dead" the same way Terry Schiavo was in a "vegitative state"? Second, was the "donor" mutilated and left alive without the donated organ? was the person killed to harvest the organ?

I fear that this is a case of eugenic donation. I define that as the harvesting of body parts from non productive "donors" so that the body parts can be given to and used by "productive people" for the "betterment of society as a whole". How much longer until people start holding off on having abortions until the third trimester so that they can sell the "biological substances" contained in their wombs for medical research and procedures such as organ "donation"?

Pyro

IRONY ALERT!

2006-09-16T08:30:00.000-07:00

Outraged over Pope Benedict XVI's remarks made during a speech in Germany, Muslims worldwide are calling for a personal apology. The link above will provide for you the text of the Pope's remarks. In short, he cited a 14th century text from a Christian Emperor that characterized Islam as violent, and that that violent spreading of a religion is wrong.

Now to the Muslim world... So outrage by this unfair assesment, or reading of a 14th century assesment, they are rioting and burning the Pope in effigy. So let me get this staight, It's not acceptable to call Islam violent. If you do make the mistake of calling them violent, they burn you in effigy, fire bomb your churches, and recall their ambassadors.

I told a guy at work that he swears and curses too much. He told me to #$%@ &@#. Nothing like proving someones point. I'm glad that the pink elephant is starting to be pointed out.

Pyro

single gender schools

2006-09-14T11:17:00.000-07:00

Just read this article, and it brings to mind something. The use of the words "equal" and "same". For some of today's people, the words are synonyms. In actuality they are not. I don't have the same rules for each of my kids (because of age differences). I don't treat all people the same. That doesn't mean that I don't use equal fairness when interacting with others. Men and women are not the same. They are, however, equal in dignity. Because of their equal dignity they deserve to be treated justly.

I believe that history bears out that single gender education is effective and cuts out lots of problems that are present when the genders are mixed. Many private schools have been doing it for hundreds of years.

The complaints against single gender schools are mostly red herrings that are being fished up to support an agenda. After all, if we recognize that women and men aren't the same (and they aren't) then somehow the genderless, same sex marriage, homosexual adoption, secular feminist, agendas will be defeated. Right? I don't know, but those seem to be the groups that fight against it. Sometimes it's easier to pick a side on an issue when you see where your enemies line up.

Do you think it bothers the left that TITLE IX was championed and signed in to law by President Richard Nixon?

Pyro

Long time no blog II

2006-09-12T12:54:00.000-07:00

Well, It's been nearly two weeks since I blogged. We were very busy at work. Several red flag days, (extreme fire conditions). I had one stretch where I was on duty (24 hour shifts) 5 out of 7 days. When I was home I had other things to do besides sit at the computer.

In a way it was similar to lent. Sometimes it does a person good to deprive themselves of an activity. It helps to refocus ones attention to some of the basics.

There is so much that occured in the last two weeks; The 9/11 anniversary, Steve Irwin's death, NFL football regular season starting, election stuff, huge oil discoveries, faith news...

I can't go back and catch up, so I will just start in again.

Back in School!!!!!!

2006-08-29T17:01:00.000-07:00

Kids are back in School. Funny thing is, they were telling me last week how they were done with Summer! I don't know if that's because Summer was terrible or because it was so good that they were all rested up. I think they really just missed their friends and were ready to get back to work.

Thankfully my kids' school is headed by a pastor who is attentive to the Catholicity of their education. There is a Mass every Friday and get this, the Mass is celebrated with fidelity to the authentic liturgy of the Church. The pastor focuses his homily on the kids and their issues but, he doesn't dumb down the liturgy or invent his own "Children's Mass" to make Church more "entertaining" for the kids. I had a similar experience when my kids went to a Missouri Synod Lutheran school. The pastor there had a church service every Wednesday for the school kids. It was done with almost identical similarity to the regular Sunday worship service. The sermon was geared at the kid level but the other stuff wasn't "dumbed down". I think lots of Christian communities sell kids short. Or maybe there is an over commercialization of "church". In order to compete in the free enterprise church environment you have to excite your customers and give them something unique. I think having a "kids service" that uses the "entertainment value" concept to make kids interested does much harm in the long run. It focuses the service on the individual instead of on God. The adjective "service" begins to modify the mortal subjects as opposed to the Divine Person. Then, when the kids are adults and out looking for their own church, they instinctively look for a community that entertains them. Maybe not on the conscious level, but it certainly happens. And it happens in both the Catholic and Protestant worlds.

Anyway, (How'd I get off on that tangent) My kids are happy to back in school. I'm happy they're back in school. My wife's happy they're back in school. Everyone's happy!! Now I have the computer and X-BOX to myself!!!!!! I mean,.... Now my wife and I can spend more quality time together.

Just wait till next week after the first test...

John Mark Karr

2006-08-29T06:39:00.000-07:00

Well, looks like Karr is just a stupid, demented, pervert and not responsible for JonBenet's murder. Will they be able to keep him off the streets? Probably not, we will most likely have to wait until he brutalizes some poor innocent child before we can protect society from this sexual deviant.

Will the news media just go to using his first and last name now? They seem to use the full name whenever they report on a serial killer or molester. Shouldn't they refrain from using the middle name until the guy is at least put on trial?

Seahawk 2006 team preview - Running Backs

2006-08-26T10:20:00.000-07:00

This part of the preview seems like a no brainer. The problem with no-brainers is that they have a way of making you look dumb. You can't take credit for being right because, it is after all a no-brainer! And if you're wrong, your dumb for not seeing it coming and just going along with the prevailing opinion. But here goes...

Half Back - Shaun Alexander 5'11" #225
What is there to say? 1800+ yards and 29 TD's last year. Shaun has talked about how he needs to have an even better year this year for the Hawks to win the Superbowl. I like that kind of talk. Realistically however, there will probably be a drop off in productivity. Even with only 1400 yards and 20 touchdowns though, Shaun will still be the starting pro-bowler.

Full Back - Mack Strong 6'0" #245
Mack finally got his due last year and started in the pro bowl. He is the best blocking full back in the NFC and that doesn't look to change this year. Mack also had a good year running the ball in 2005 and set a Seahawk playoff record for the longest run during the Redskin game after Alexander went out with a concussion. He is in the twilight of his career with 14 years in the league.

Backups -
Maurice Morris 5'11" #202
Mo is faster and quicker than Shaun but doesn't have the field vision or shiftyness that #37 brings to the game. Mo is experienced with the offensive scheme and can be trusted to spell Shaun without it affecting the play calling. He is not a legitimate starting NFL half back but is a good insurance policy for Shaun.

Leonard Weaver 6'0" #251
Weaver has been impressive thus far this pre-season. He has shown the ability to fill in at both fullback and halfback. He is a big bruising back who is also fast on his feet. This in two pre-season games he has 15 rushes for 54 yards and a touchdown. He also has two catches for 7 yards.

Josh Scobey 6'0" #220
Scobey was with us last year and was used mostly as a kick returner. He stuggled in the playoffs and isn't really that reliable in my opinion.

Ran Carthon 6'0" #218
four rushes for 19 yards this pre-season. Father was a good running back

David Kirtman 6'0" #230
Drafted out of that USC program. Overshadowed by Reggie Bush and Lendale White. Time will tell if he's a diamond in the rough. He has three yards in his only attempt so far.

We have the talent, the health, and a history of success. This is the stronges part of our team. Hopefully Alexander doesn't slack off now that he has the big contract. And I don't believe in curses so the Madden and Superbowl loser things have no bearing on my outlook. The only thing to improve as far as I'm concerned is Alexanders pass blocking skills.

Overall A