Why is it that if a person is taking a test and there are two possible answers and the person guesses at the answer, they usually get it wrong? It should be a 50-50 chance of getting it correct but, it never works out that way. In the Navy we had a saying, we called it 50-50-90. When you had to come up with an either/or answer, you had a 50-50 chance of being wrong 90% of the time.
I was playing Texas Hold'm over my Independence Day vacation. I entered a tournament with my Dad and brother at the local Indian casino. It was a horrible tournament with lots of dumb rules. I made the final table and was playing very well. Suddenly, my 50-50-90 curse struck! I was in early position and went all-in (ten times the blind) with pocket Kings, I was called by the small blind who had pocket 9's. Everyone else folded. I had about a 90% chance of winning. I lost when he flopped a third 9. Bad luck is one thing, but for that guy to even give me any action was crazy. I don't mind being unlucky, but to be unlucky against someone who doesn't know how to play or bet just drives me up the wall. Two days later we had the annual family Hold em tournament. It's a friendly family game between uncles, brothers, dads, cousins, nephews, aunts, moms, grandparents/children. A nice relaxing game that pays the top three at a 50-30-20 rate. The champion pocketed about $120.00. I went from being chip leader to being out because of two bad beats. Both times the person (my nephew) filled an inside straight to beat my better hand. The second time he got runner runner!! I'm cursed! But it was fun, I don't mind losing to family, and he was pretty happy.
The temperature was 100+ in the shade every day. We spent lots of time sitting under shade drinking Corona's and eating barbeque. The kids had a blast playing in water all day and running around "Grandmother's". Bed time was usually 11:00 pm, that was when the kids finally got tired. Also, 11:00 pm was when the temperature finally got below 90 degrees. My boy and his cousin, who is about a year older, made their first independant trip to the local convenience store together. The store is in sight and about 3 blocks away. My brother and I sent them on a mission with the wagon. They were to retrieve 10 bags of ice. We gave them about $5.00 more than the price of the ice and told them they could do what they want with the change. They came back 30 minutes later with 10 bags of ice, 3 bags of marbles, a bag of water balloons, and a bag of chips. They were very pleased with themselves. We were pleased with them also.
Finally, I was presented with the temptation of getting in to a theology debate over the perpetual virginity of Mary. My folks have a friend who, as I understand, was raised Catholic but is now in some type of Pentacostal style church. She had a question for my Dad regarding the subject because she was reading a book that stated Catholics believed in the perpetual virginity of Mary. She was simply wondering if the book was accurate. I was called over to field the question. (GETTING SIDETRACKED HERE) You see, since my reversion to the Catholic Church, which involved lots of study of doctrine and theology, I can't be around my family without being asked faith/doctrine questions. Some of my relatives refer to me as "St. Pyro" or " The Deacon". I guess because of how serious I am about practicing the Catholic faith. Sometimes I'm asked questions because there is a sincere desire to understand, sometimes it's because the questioner wants to have a debate. In the past I enjoyed feeding either motivation. Now I choose not to debate, though I want to with every fiber of my being. But I do answer the seeking information questions (END OF SIDETRACK). So this person asks if the perpetual virginity of Mary is a true Catholic doctine. I told her that it was, and that it wasn't just Catholic "doctrine" but that it was Orthodox doctrine as well. I even informed her that Martin Luther and other Protestant Reformers professed it. She then countered with the "fact" from Scripture that Mary had other children (in fact Scripture never discusses Mary having other children, it refers to some other individuals as being the "brothers/bretheren" (english translation) of Jesus). I mentioned that two of the four "brothers" were named elsewhere in scripture as the sons of a different Mary and Clopas or Alphaeus. I began to explain the correlation between the Old Testament Ark of the Covenant and Mary as the New Testament "fulfillment" of the Ark of the Covenant. She wasn't interested and stated that as a faithful Jewish woman she would have done her duty and had other children with her husband. I then disengaged and ended with restating that what she read in her book was accurate and that yes Catholic teaching was that Mary was a perpetual virgin.
It's difficult to address any question about theology without first exploring the topic of authority. Does authority exclusively reside in individual interpretation of Scripture? Is authority shared between a divinely established ecclesial heirarchy and Scripture? Is it possible for an individual to be wrong in their personal theological conclusions derived from studying Scripture? Is it possible for a divinely established ecclesial heirarchy to be wrong when declaring theological truths? Exactly what did Jesus mean when he said "...the Spirit... will guide you into all truth..." John 16: 13.
I understand the difficulty with Mary. When I was away from the Church, I learned to have difficulty with Marian doctrine and the Communion of Saints. For me, I had to understand from where authority came. Only after a person gets a firm understanding of authority can they begin to fully explore all of God's revelation. To fully understand authority requires a trip through Christian history. It's not enough to read what is accepted now by (some) Christians as authoritative Scripture. A person needs to understand how the earliest Christians viewed Sacred Scripture. How they lived their faith life. How they operated in community. How they cooperated with eachother. How they interacted with those outside their communion. How they recognized and dealt with error within the communion of believers. And what they meant when they wrote things down, such as the Apostle's Creed.
Curiously, my folk's friend didn't dwell long on Scripture. She sidestepped the fact that some of the examples of Jesus' "brothers" were elsewhere in Scripture referred to as children of different parents. She began using the extra biblical argument that as a good Jewish wife she would have been having lots of additional children with Joseph after Jesus' birth.
Since I didn't want to argue I didn't try to help her explore the inconsistancy with her tactic. As good Jews, why would Jesus and Mary and John have set up that unorthodox arangement for her care after Jesus' death? Where and when exactly did the duty of a wife in the covenant (old and new) get changed from being fruitful and open to life, to practicing artificial birth control to limit the size of a family? I'm glad she's open to viewing faith matters through the wide lense of cultural conditions, historical context, Scriptural exegisis, and doctrinal continuity. But there needs to be consistency in such things.
When a person looks back through history and researches the pedigree of certain doctrines and beliefs they begin to see just how "Catholic" the Church was since the beginning. And they see just how innovative recent Christian traditions are when they profess things such as Mary and Joseph having many other children.
Blessed Mary, ever virgin, pray for us and lead us to your Son our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
Pyro
6/28/2006
Early Independence Day
Because of my work schedule and because I will be away for the holiday, I must do my Independence Day post early. Please forgive my prematurity (I think I just made that word up). I am very fond of my country. For all her flaws she is the greatest country in history. First, let us remember the cost of liberty.
Revolutionary War - 4,435
War of 1812 - 2,260
Mexican War - 13,283
Civil War (Union) - 364,511
Spanish-American War - 2,446
World War I - 116,516
World War II - 405,399
Korean War - 36,574
Vietnam War - 58,209
Gulf War I - 382
War on Terror (Includes
those killed on 9-11-01) - 5,859
* all causualty numbers were taken from official DOD sources here and here. September 11, 2001 casualty numbers were taken from here. I subtracted 19 from the 9-11-01 numbers because I chose not to include the terrorists in the total.
And now some quotes from our first president...
"I am sure that never was a people, who had more reason to acknowledge a Divine interposition in their affairs, than those of the United States; and I should be pained to believe that they have forgotten that agency, which was so often manifested during our Revolution, or that they failed to consider the omnipotence of that God who is alone able to protect them."
"Let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle."
George Wasington, 1732-1799
Commander, Continental Army
President, United States of America
Happy Birthday America!!
6/27/2006
Morning "News" on CBS
I guess I'm not to smart. About two weeks ago I was sitting here at the computer in the morning with the Today Show on in the background. This morning I had a CBS program (Early Show) on. Their first two stories were typical of MSM "news". First, the anchor reported two facts. The congress was one vote away from passing legislation that would support a Constitutional amendment which restricted burning the American flag. The second was about the leaking of American activities by the New York Times regarding the tracking of overseas financial transactions in order to combat terrorism.
I won't even get in to how I feel about both of those topics. They made the report and then cut to their Washington correspondent live in front of the White House. The correspondant assured all the viewers that there was no substance or sincerity to either issue and that it is all simply midterm election posturing. And in regards to the info leak, it was simply the administration making a lot of noise regarding an issue that is their only strongpoint. Please...! either the Bush Administration is wrong in the war on terror or their right, you can't have it both ways CBS!
This all reminds me of the scene from the Wizard of OZ when Toto pulls back the curtain revealing the secret of the "Wizard". And the "Wizard" shouts, "pay no attention to that man behind the curtain"!! in other words, don't believe the facts of what you see, believe in the fantasy with which you are presented.
Pyro
6/26/2006
New Jerusalem?
This interesting article discusses an evolution in Arab/Muslim thought regarding the city of Jerusalem. It seems that Muslims are putting the revisionist history process to work. Just as leftists and other extreme liberals have done in the United States regarding the Christian influence on America's founding documents. This is nothing more than poisoning the well on a grand scale. Isn't it interesting how significant tradition is in a culture? Books and other written histories are always being manipulated, invented, or discredited. But tradition, because it is a thing that lives with a people, a thing that has a memory, is much more difficult to defeat. Just as all sincere people [poisoning the well ;-) ] "know" that the United States' founders and founding documents are Christian in orgin, everyone "knows" that the Jewish (Judah's tribe) people lived in Jerusalem where they had their Temple.
Pyro
Pyro
6/23/2006
Foster Parents Union
It seems that State foster parents are the latest group to feel the need to resort to organizing in to a union. The interesting thing is, most of the foster parents I know are committed Christians who do foster parenting out of Gospel charity. Most unions walk lock step with the Democracts. Will this lead to a union that is mostly conservative in practice? I don't know, but I wish them luck against the State and the leftist/sucular elitists who run the DSHS offices. I know two foster parents very well and over the last 10 years the training they have to attend has become inundated with crap from the Gay lobby. It's pretty disgusting. Isn't it ironic that the gays are some of the loudest complainers of "legislating morality"? Anyway, unionizing is always done in response to poor treatment. What has changed for foster parents in the last 10 years except for a State DSHS that has careened off to the mucky swamp that's left of the road?
Pyro
Pyro
6/20/2006
Mel Gibson's new movie, APOCALYPTO
I just watched the trailer for Mel's new movie Apocalypto. The movie is set in Mayan times and from what I can gather, has several storylines. One storyline follows a group of Mayans who are competing in a tournament of a Mayan game that is a cross between soccer and basketball. From watching the trailer I believe that the bigger storyline is the fall of the Mayan empire, or at least the fall of a certain group from power within the Mayan empire. It looks to me as if the movie will be awesome. If you like Mel's typical genre of movies, then this will definately be a must see. I think Mel is making a commentary on modern times with this film. There is a caption during the trailer that reads "A great civilization is not conquered from without, until it has destroyed itself from within". This is a Will Durant quote. My mind races as I plug in all the current situations which this quote indicts. Christiandom and the splintering of her children in to competing factions. Western society with it's gangreous limbs and diseased heart swallowing all manner of poison in the disorded desire to consume all that presents itself as nourishment. American liberals and conservatives and their reinterpretation of the founding documents, and the intent of the document's writers, in a misguuided desire to lend historicity and authority to the current philosophical errors of modernism.
On whatever level you decide to view the film, it should be an enjoyable exerience.
Pyro
On whatever level you decide to view the film, it should be an enjoyable exerience.
Pyro
Another Beheading
It appears as if the Islamists have brought more non-Muslims to "justice". The remains of the two American soldiers from the 502 Infantry Regiment who were missing have apparantly been found by American forces. My question is this: is all this violence being perpetrated by Muslims in the name of Allah simply a case of a rogue group using "God" as their justification and recruiting tool for seeking power and riches? Or is the end goal of Islam really world domination, subjugation, and conversion by any means necessary?
Pyro
Pyro
6/17/2006
Happy Father's Day
Happy Father's Day to all you fathers out there!
As with the Mother's Day post, I wanted to incorporate some Byzantine style iconography here.
6/15/2006
Religion of Peace
Why were those Muslim terrorists plotting to do an attack in Canada? I mean, if you listen or watch much MSM reports, you get the impression that the only reason there are terrorist attacks is because they are retaliating for wrongs committed by Westerners against Islam. Isn't Canada the Westernmost member of the European Union? Don't they march lockstep with the left leaning cultural elitists who seem to think that everything would be better if everything was tolerated? Visit this website to get a perspective you won't hear from NBC, ABC, CNN, or The New York Times on the Jihad against the West and the War on Terror.
6/13/2006
6/11/2006
Parental Guidance Suggested
A recent news story relates how a new indie movie earned a PG rating for being overly religious. I haven't seen the movie but I will comment on the situation. The Motion Picture Association of America has a rating system for films. This rating system is in place because of consumer demand and governmental requirements. The system has the following ratings with these criteria:
G General audiences (all ages permitted)
PG Parental Guidance Suggested (some material may not be suitable for children
PG-13 Some material may be inappropriate for children under 13.
R Restricted (under 17 requires accompanying parent or legal guardian)
NC-17 No one under 17 admitted
Now, this film was given the PG rating for being "so openly religous". I can see both sides of this issue. One on hand, it seems silly that a film about religion would be something that needs a PG rating because it may not be suitable for children. How could a story about God or about faith not be suitable for children? I'll tell you how. What if the church or individual who produced the film had a very powerful and unique story to tell. What if the film completely contradicted the faith and morals of the parents? Maybe the rating is not about how the rating bureau feels about God and religion but is respecting the religious diversity of the population.
In the end, I feel the rating says little about the film or the film industry. The rating does however speak volumes of the state of parenthood in this country.
Pyro
G General audiences (all ages permitted)
PG Parental Guidance Suggested (some material may not be suitable for children
PG-13 Some material may be inappropriate for children under 13.
R Restricted (under 17 requires accompanying parent or legal guardian)
NC-17 No one under 17 admitted
Now, this film was given the PG rating for being "so openly religous". I can see both sides of this issue. One on hand, it seems silly that a film about religion would be something that needs a PG rating because it may not be suitable for children. How could a story about God or about faith not be suitable for children? I'll tell you how. What if the church or individual who produced the film had a very powerful and unique story to tell. What if the film completely contradicted the faith and morals of the parents? Maybe the rating is not about how the rating bureau feels about God and religion but is respecting the religious diversity of the population.
In the end, I feel the rating says little about the film or the film industry. The rating does however speak volumes of the state of parenthood in this country.
Pyro
6/08/2006
Conscientious objector?
I'm not going to stand in judgement of Lt. Ehren Watada and whether or not he truely finds the war in Iraq unconscionable. He really may have come to the recent conclusion that the Iraqi front in the War on Terror is not a just conflict. But isn't the part of it that would be objectionable over. Aren't our forces that are there now serving the purpose of providing stability for the new government and preventing wholesale sectarian violence? It seems to me that this is precisely the type of activity a person of moral conscience would feel good about being involved in. I can understand the person who objects to our initiation of hostilities in Iraq and who believes it to have been unjust. There is legitimate room in traditional Just War Doctrine (paragraph 2309 in the Catechism of the Catholic Church) to refute that this front in the War on Terror met the just war criteria. There is also the ability to make a legitimate argument for the Iraqi front.
I hope that Lt. Watada is being honest with himself. I also hope that his actions aren't being influenced and manipulated by those parties who are simply opposed to the President, his administration, and his policies. That, I obeject to in good conscience.
I hope that Lt. Watada is being honest with himself. I also hope that his actions aren't being influenced and manipulated by those parties who are simply opposed to the President, his administration, and his policies. That, I obeject to in good conscience.
6/06/2006
The Today Show
I had the misfortune this morning of waking up to the Today Show on the TV. That's the price you pay for falling asleep watching Conan O'Brien. Matt was interviewing Ann Coulter (gag), and grilling her over her new book "Godless: The Church of Liberalism". Now I'm no fan of Matt's but, Ann Coulter is a disgusting example of conservativism. The entire interview was laughable. The obvious dislike between the two was very evident. Matt and his MSM attack on all views that conflict with the leftist agenda. Ann and her zeal in attacking all that is liberalism and defending all that is conservativism. It made for a very distasteful interview. The part that left me the most dumbstruck (from now on referred to as "Demo'struck") was when Matt retorted, (after listening to Ann explain how liberalism is a religion with it's own celebrations such as the celebration of abortion through marches and rallies), that they aren't celebrating abortion but rather, they are celebrating the right to choose. How moronic! The right to choose what, a flavor of ice cream? The right to choose a university from which to get an education? The right to choose a job? It's not about the right to choose, and every abortion supporter knows it! It's about keeping it legal to kill innocent babies while they are in their mother's wombs. That just doesn't sound very nice so they change the words a bit, it makes it easier to sleep at night I guess. You want to see what the "right to choose" looks like? Click Here (caution, this link contains images of aborted babies and is VERY DISTURBING!!!) but then, killing babies is a very disturbing thing. The time to choose if you will be having a baby is when you (men and women) decide to have sex.
Pyro
Pyro
6/03/2006
The Choices We Make
I was having a discussion with a friend of mine the other day and we got on to the topic of church choice. It seems that many of my conversations with friends end up having something to do with religion or church or faith. This conversation was very laid back without much contention. I couldn't help but wonder how the conversation would have gone if I had been having it several years ago.
When I first reverted to the Catholic faith, I was very aggressive in the way I discussed issues of faith with friends and family members. You see, for some reason I enjoy debating and arguing. I find a thrill in it the way a boxer finds a thrill in the pugelistic art. I think that ultimately I didn't care as much about the subject of the argument as I did about myself "winning" the argument. In discussions where the subject matter is political or philisophical this attitude can be annoying to the other party. In discussions where the subject matter is Faith and religion, this attitude just causes both parties pain and stands in the way of fruitful dialogue.
I'm glad that the recent conversation with my friend didn't happen 4 years ago. My friend was talking about how he chose the church that he currently goes to. There were a number of reasons given which to me, all seemed to center around the experience of attending Sunday services and personal interaction with other members of the community. All of the things he talked about were in and of themselves good; High quality music, comfortable atmosphere, friendly people, entertaining presentation of a relevant message, exciting fellowship activities throughout the week, personal interaction/interest from the ministry team... You get the picture.
Now, I'm glad my friend is serious about having a relationship with God. I'm happy that he takes seriously the Commandment to Keep Holy the Lords Day. Throughout (Judeo/Christian) history, the manifestation of keeping this Commandment has included attending community worship services on the Lords/Sabbath day. To do otherwise would be less than genuine and lack fidelity to the Gospel. But, his reasons for choosing which Christian community to be part of seemed to lack a very important element of the decision making process. Does the community proclaim the Gospel? Is what they teach true?
It seems at first blush to be a silly question. They use the Bible, it's Sunday, I'm at church listening to an ordained minister preach. I'm hearing the truth. As a new Christian, in the infancy of ones faith, there is a certain lack of perspective and an innocent ignorance that makes even thinking of this question not come to mind. After all, all Christians basically believe the same thing right? My friend was surprised to learn that certain "truths" he had been taught were not the same "truths" that the church accross the street teaches.
As an example, my friend had been instructed that the celebration of the Lords Supper, or Communion, is simply a symbolic rememberence of what took place between the Apostles and Christ. Specifically that the elements of bread and wine (or grape juice in his case), are simply symbolic of Jesus' body and blood and that they remain only bread and wine (juice) throughout the celebration of communion. Across the street, (literally) at the Lutheran Church they teach that it is not simply bread and wine (juice), but that something very remarkable occurs during the celebration of communion and the bread and wine (juice) undergo a transformation of their substance and also become the true body and blood of Jesus! How incredible! That is a significant difference in theology. A mile further up the road, the Catholics hold that not only does the substance of the bread and wine become the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Jesus Christ, they also cease in substance to be bread and wine while maintaining the appearance of bread and wine. When these differences are taken into account along with the fullness of divine revelation, one is confronted with a decision. What is the truth? This is the same question that Pontious Pilate asked Christ (John 18: 38).
I think too often the answer at which a person arrives is based on what they first were taught. A certain primacy of introduction if you will. Nobody wants to think that they have been wrong. Or perhaps they don't think what they believe to be true regarding a specific theological point is important, as long as they believe in the basic bedrock truths (very ironic).
To me, the answer to Pilate's question has to take in to account what has been professed by the followers of Christ throughout history with a continuity of substance. If a belief doesn't have a historical pedigree it's probably a tradition of men.
I don't want to use the same criteria for choosing a church that I use for choosing a restaurant or a concert or some fraternal community group like a book club or quilters guild. It certainly makes it more pleasant when getting together on Sunday is fun and entertaining but the truth is the real substance and is what matters most. Substance matters more than appearance. The same holds true for the reality of the Eucharist of Communion, the licitness of artificial contraception, and the choosing of a Church.
Quid Est Veritas?
When I first reverted to the Catholic faith, I was very aggressive in the way I discussed issues of faith with friends and family members. You see, for some reason I enjoy debating and arguing. I find a thrill in it the way a boxer finds a thrill in the pugelistic art. I think that ultimately I didn't care as much about the subject of the argument as I did about myself "winning" the argument. In discussions where the subject matter is political or philisophical this attitude can be annoying to the other party. In discussions where the subject matter is Faith and religion, this attitude just causes both parties pain and stands in the way of fruitful dialogue.
I'm glad that the recent conversation with my friend didn't happen 4 years ago. My friend was talking about how he chose the church that he currently goes to. There were a number of reasons given which to me, all seemed to center around the experience of attending Sunday services and personal interaction with other members of the community. All of the things he talked about were in and of themselves good; High quality music, comfortable atmosphere, friendly people, entertaining presentation of a relevant message, exciting fellowship activities throughout the week, personal interaction/interest from the ministry team... You get the picture.
Now, I'm glad my friend is serious about having a relationship with God. I'm happy that he takes seriously the Commandment to Keep Holy the Lords Day. Throughout (Judeo/Christian) history, the manifestation of keeping this Commandment has included attending community worship services on the Lords/Sabbath day. To do otherwise would be less than genuine and lack fidelity to the Gospel. But, his reasons for choosing which Christian community to be part of seemed to lack a very important element of the decision making process. Does the community proclaim the Gospel? Is what they teach true?
It seems at first blush to be a silly question. They use the Bible, it's Sunday, I'm at church listening to an ordained minister preach. I'm hearing the truth. As a new Christian, in the infancy of ones faith, there is a certain lack of perspective and an innocent ignorance that makes even thinking of this question not come to mind. After all, all Christians basically believe the same thing right? My friend was surprised to learn that certain "truths" he had been taught were not the same "truths" that the church accross the street teaches.
As an example, my friend had been instructed that the celebration of the Lords Supper, or Communion, is simply a symbolic rememberence of what took place between the Apostles and Christ. Specifically that the elements of bread and wine (or grape juice in his case), are simply symbolic of Jesus' body and blood and that they remain only bread and wine (juice) throughout the celebration of communion. Across the street, (literally) at the Lutheran Church they teach that it is not simply bread and wine (juice), but that something very remarkable occurs during the celebration of communion and the bread and wine (juice) undergo a transformation of their substance and also become the true body and blood of Jesus! How incredible! That is a significant difference in theology. A mile further up the road, the Catholics hold that not only does the substance of the bread and wine become the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Jesus Christ, they also cease in substance to be bread and wine while maintaining the appearance of bread and wine. When these differences are taken into account along with the fullness of divine revelation, one is confronted with a decision. What is the truth? This is the same question that Pontious Pilate asked Christ (John 18: 38).
I think too often the answer at which a person arrives is based on what they first were taught. A certain primacy of introduction if you will. Nobody wants to think that they have been wrong. Or perhaps they don't think what they believe to be true regarding a specific theological point is important, as long as they believe in the basic bedrock truths (very ironic).
To me, the answer to Pilate's question has to take in to account what has been professed by the followers of Christ throughout history with a continuity of substance. If a belief doesn't have a historical pedigree it's probably a tradition of men.
I don't want to use the same criteria for choosing a church that I use for choosing a restaurant or a concert or some fraternal community group like a book club or quilters guild. It certainly makes it more pleasant when getting together on Sunday is fun and entertaining but the truth is the real substance and is what matters most. Substance matters more than appearance. The same holds true for the reality of the Eucharist of Communion, the licitness of artificial contraception, and the choosing of a Church.
Quid Est Veritas?
5/28/2006
Memorial Day
Today is a day to honor the fallen. Especially those who have fallen in battle in service to America.
I will highlight one such hero today. This hero epitomizes what it means to be an American, and more importantly, what it means to be a Christian. He was posthumously awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor for his actions taking place in Quang Tin Province, Republic of Vietnam, 4 September 1967.
Lt. Vincent Capodanno was a member of the United States Navy Chaplain Corps. He was born in N.Y. City in 1929 and was a missionary priest with an religious order that is very active in Southeast Asia. When the United States became involved in the Vietnam War, Fr. Capodanno asked to be released from his missionary work to serve with the Navy Chaplain corps in Vietnam. There is a great book written in 2000 that tells the story of his life. The book is titled "The Grunt Padre" and was written by Fr. Daniel Mode, himself a Navy Chaplain. Below is the citation from his Medal of Honor.
I will highlight one such hero today. This hero epitomizes what it means to be an American, and more importantly, what it means to be a Christian. He was posthumously awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor for his actions taking place in Quang Tin Province, Republic of Vietnam, 4 September 1967.
Lt. Vincent Capodanno was a member of the United States Navy Chaplain Corps. He was born in N.Y. City in 1929 and was a missionary priest with an religious order that is very active in Southeast Asia. When the United States became involved in the Vietnam War, Fr. Capodanno asked to be released from his missionary work to serve with the Navy Chaplain corps in Vietnam. There is a great book written in 2000 that tells the story of his life. The book is titled "The Grunt Padre" and was written by Fr. Daniel Mode, himself a Navy Chaplain. Below is the citation from his Medal of Honor.
Medal of Honor Citation
Awarded Posthumously To Capodanno, Vincent R.
Rank and organization: Lieutenant, U.S. Navy, Chaplain Corps, 3d Battalion, 5th Marines, 1st Marine Division (Rein), FMF. Place and date: Quang Tin Province, Republic of Vietnam, 4 September 1967. Entered service at: Staten Island, N.Y. Born: 13 February 1929, Staten Island, N.Y. Citation: For conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity at the risk of his life above and beyond the call of duty as Chaplain of the 3d Battalion, in connection with operations against enemy forces. In response to reports that the 2d Platoon of M Company was in danger of being overrun by a massed enemy assaulting force, Lt. Capodanno left the relative safety of the company command post and ran through an open area raked with fire, directly to the beleaguered platoon. Disregarding the intense enemy small-arms, automatic-weapons, and mortar fire, he moved about the battlefield administering last rites to the dying and giving medical aid to the wounded. When an exploding mortar round inflicted painful multiple wounds to his arms and legs, and severed a portion of his right hand, he steadfastly refused all medical aid. Instead, he directed the corpsmen to help their wounded comrades and, with calm vigor, continued to move about the battlefield as he provided encouragement by voice and example to the valiant marines. Upon encountering a wounded corpsman in the direct line of fire of an enemy machine gunner positioned approximately 15 yards away, Lt. Capodanno rushed a daring attempt to aid and assist the mortally wounded corpsman. At that instant, only inches from his goal, he was struck down by a burst of machine gun fire. By his heroic conduct on the battlefield, and his inspiring example, Lt. Capodanno upheld the finest traditions of the U.S. Naval Service. He gallantly gave his life in the cause of freedom.
-
-
The book details the activities on that battlefield from many of the eyewitnesses who are still alive today. One Marine who had been attended to by Fr. Capodanno just prior to Capodanno's death attributes his survival to Fr. Capodanno's assitance, but espescially his praying with him and holding him as the Marine lay wounded on the battlefield. He describes having a sense of peace fall over him as soon as Fr. Capodanno ministered to him.
The cause for Father Capodanno's sainthood was opened on May 21, 2006 when he was declared Servant Of God by the Church.
5/25/2006
politics and leadership
all from G.K. Chesterton
"Men are ruled, at this minute by the clock, by liars who refuse them news, and by fools who cannot govern." - The New Name, Utopia of Usurers and Other Essays, 1917
"There is only one thing that stands in our midst, attenuated and threatened, but enthroned in some power like a ghost of the Middle Ages: the Trade Unions." - A Short History of England
"I would rather a boy learnt in the roughest school the courage to hit a politician, or gained in the hardest school the learning to refute him - rather than that he should gain in the most enlightened school the cunning to copy him." (ILN 8-31-12)
Except this one...
So much of what we call management consists in making it difficult for people to work.
Peter Drucker (1909 - 2005)
"Men are ruled, at this minute by the clock, by liars who refuse them news, and by fools who cannot govern." - The New Name, Utopia of Usurers and Other Essays, 1917
"There is only one thing that stands in our midst, attenuated and threatened, but enthroned in some power like a ghost of the Middle Ages: the Trade Unions." - A Short History of England
"I would rather a boy learnt in the roughest school the courage to hit a politician, or gained in the hardest school the learning to refute him - rather than that he should gain in the most enlightened school the cunning to copy him." (ILN 8-31-12)
Except this one...
So much of what we call management consists in making it difficult for people to work.
Peter Drucker (1909 - 2005)
Immigration, President Fox, SAY WA
Mexican President Vicente Fox made a much publicized visit to Washington State yesterday. He first stopped in Washington's agricultural heart near Yakima. He visited an apple orchard and other agriculture related locations such as a fruit packing plant. I couldn't help but wonder if Fox was looking for work as his term will soon be up and he will be leaving behind a Mexican economy that is just a bad as the one he inherited. Perhaps that is why he is opposed to a crackdown on illegal immigration by our country. Here are some things that I know from experience.
1) I have seen Mexican immigrants, both illegal and legal, do work on my reletives farms. They are hard workers and are friendly. They are very thankful for the opportunity to work for a living.
2) I have seen whites that have the fortune of being born in the United States ask for work and get hired by these same reletives. Almost to a person they were lazy, ungrateful, and unfriendly. They wanted to be paid up front and couldn't be counted on to do a good job.
3) even with todays advanced industrial technologies, farm work is labor intensive. Contrary to popular opinion, American farmers are not rolling in the dough and getting rich at the expense of oppressed migrant workers.
4) the American agriculture industry is in grave danger from cheap foreign imports. China, and other countries, are planting millions upon millions of acres of farmland and are flooding the market with produce that truely does come from oppressed workers.
5) the United States has a duty to control the ingress of people through her borders. This is primarily a security issue.
Do we round up a kick out all people in this country who are illegal immigrants (don't give me that "undocumented workers" crap, thats like calling a tresspasser a untypical visitor)? I don't think so. The ones who can't provide proof that they are currently working or living in a household where there is a worker supporting them, they can be deported. If they don't want to become naturalized citizens, bye bye. Why should the United States have to support other countries welfare cases?
I will end with a question. Why hasn't Mexico, a North American country like the United States and Canada, been able to develope in to a 1st world country. What holds them back from true prosperity. The country is rich in natural resources. The Mexican people have a great work ethic. The nation has warm water ports on two oceans. What gives?
5/23/2006
BIRD FLU ALERT
Fox news is carrying a story that the World Health Organization is reporting the possible person to person transmission of the Avian Flu virus (H5N1 virus). Up until now, it has been the belief that all human cases were contracted from infected birds. What does this mean for us? If you haven't started preparing yourself and your family for a flu pandemic you should really get serious about doing so. Here is the government plan for a possible pandemic. What can you do?
Make sure you have a disaster prep kit at your home.
1) Have a quality first aid kit, focus on trauma, environmental emergencies, and whatever special needs medications & equipment that are specific to your family
2) Water. the average person needs at least 1 gal of water per day for consumption, food prep, and hygiene. Most disaster prep books recommend a 3 day supply. As we all saw in New Orleans it would be more prudent to have at least a two week supply.
3) Food: the simpler the better. I'd pack canned/ready to eat meat, vegetables, and fruit. Stay away from things that need to be cooked or heated. Energy bars and a supply of multi-vitamins should also be included.
4) Medication: as we saw in New Orleans, this could be a matter of life or death. Diabetics were dying simply because their 3 day supply of insulin was exhausted.
5) store other tools, clothing, and supplies as appropriate. (click here for examples)
6) firearm: the sad fact is that when things went poorly in the New Orleans disaster, it didn't take long for a major American city to become a dog eat dog third world slum. In many instances the lawless and ill prepared took advantage of the situation and stole other people life sustaining food, water, and shelter. Don't let that happen to you, we have a second amendment for a reason. If they want to steal your food and water, give em some lead instead.
New Ship testing
So if you were the United States Navy where would you go to test new ship designs? If your answer was Lake Pend Oreille in North Idaho you would be right! The lake, which is the fourth deepest in the U.S. at 1100+ feet, has been used for decades by the Navy to test submarine technology. Now, for the first time, it is being used to evaluate some new skimmer (surface ship) technology. The test platform is a 1/4 size model based on the next generation Destroyer DD(X). The model was built by Dakota Creek Industries of Anacortes, home of the fighting Seahawks!!
The model is testing some new water jet propulsion system (catapiller drive?) along with alternative power systems that are supposed to make her much quieter when underway. The hull design is also new, incorporating much stealth technology borrowed from the Air Force.
I think the concept is very interesting and will improve our Navy's ability to fulfill it's primary mission, maintain sea dominance. The only drawback as far as I'm concerned is that ships have a certain beauty and grace, this new ship doesn't maintain that traditional shape. But, I'll never be one to choose appearance over substance.
In the end DD(X) is just another target for submarines like all the other surface ships.
p.s. notice how much the DD(X) looks like a surfaced submarine?
Pyro
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
