... but not as bad as in Canada.
A new survey shows that around 22% of Catholics in Italy attend weekly Mass. I think the number in Canada is similar, if not slighty lower.
The study revealed some interesting points:
- 1/3 people who went to college/university attended Mass every week, and yet only 1/10 people in Italy have any post-secondary education. This means regular Mass attendees are, generally speaking, more educated than those who do not atttend Mass on a regular basis.
- The attendance rates are higher for people between the ages of 25-40. Generation of 1968 anyone?
- Priests were asked to guess the percentage themselves. Almost all of them chose figures extremely close to what was actually found in the survey.
On a related note, an article I just read discusses that the decline in vocations and Mass attendance always occurs parallel to an overal decline in the practice of the Sacrament of Confession. Gee, I wonder why?
Thursday, February 08, 2007
Legalized Prostitution?
Driving home I listened to Liberal MP Keith Martin promote the idea of legalized prostitution. I don't know the subject very well, but I do know that prostitution is considered a 'forgettable' crime by many in the police forces across Canada. And I would say that most Canadians 'forget' prostitution too.
Until 50 or so prostitutes are brutally murdered.
With Pickton's ugly mug pasted over every daily newspaper, prostitution is suddenly back on everyone's minds. Legalized prostitution, it is often argued in the media, would provide the women (little if anything is ever mentioned of gay male prostitutes) with access to 'safer' sex and legal protection. MP Keith Martin, after telling his radio audience that he doesn't moralize, then told us that 'prostitution has always been with us, and that it's time we accepted that'.
Now whatever ivory tower dwellers like Martin may say, legalized prostitution is a zero sum victory, that is, it brings absolutely no positive ends other than the satisfaction for those who wanted it in place. As studies in the Netherlands and Germany have shown, legalized prostitution has little effect on reducing prostitution, which should be the goal of any new legislation. Even more so, legalized prostitution nevertheless posits us with the same problems as illegal prostitution. Women are still 'indentured', pyschologically, emotionaly and physically abused, and often left with nothing once their bodies are regarded as being no longer useful. In Germany, one of the richest countries in the world, young unemployed women are fearful of heading to employment offices because 'sex worker' is given parity with other professions under the law, meaning that they have to consider entering the sex industry in order to qualify for unemployment insurance.
Thus we'll still be faced by the same problems if prostitution is legalized, but for one difference. Legal prostitution is taxable, illegal prostitution is not.
The truth laid bare for all to see.
Until 50 or so prostitutes are brutally murdered.
With Pickton's ugly mug pasted over every daily newspaper, prostitution is suddenly back on everyone's minds. Legalized prostitution, it is often argued in the media, would provide the women (little if anything is ever mentioned of gay male prostitutes) with access to 'safer' sex and legal protection. MP Keith Martin, after telling his radio audience that he doesn't moralize, then told us that 'prostitution has always been with us, and that it's time we accepted that'.
Now whatever ivory tower dwellers like Martin may say, legalized prostitution is a zero sum victory, that is, it brings absolutely no positive ends other than the satisfaction for those who wanted it in place. As studies in the Netherlands and Germany have shown, legalized prostitution has little effect on reducing prostitution, which should be the goal of any new legislation. Even more so, legalized prostitution nevertheless posits us with the same problems as illegal prostitution. Women are still 'indentured', pyschologically, emotionaly and physically abused, and often left with nothing once their bodies are regarded as being no longer useful. In Germany, one of the richest countries in the world, young unemployed women are fearful of heading to employment offices because 'sex worker' is given parity with other professions under the law, meaning that they have to consider entering the sex industry in order to qualify for unemployment insurance.
Thus we'll still be faced by the same problems if prostitution is legalized, but for one difference. Legal prostitution is taxable, illegal prostitution is not.
The truth laid bare for all to see.
Wednesday, February 07, 2007
More Fun Climate Change Facts....
...as reported by your friendly transnational IPCC.
- Tempature is now predicted to increase 3 degrees in the next century, rather than 3.5 degrees as was originally claimed in the previous IPCC report
- Sea levels may rise up to 17 inches, down from 'at least between 20 and 30' from the previous report
- N/A to the infamous hockey stick graph, published as fact in the first IPCC, and then used to club 'cc' deniers into submission, until that is everyone realised it was a bunch of phooey
- Humans actions are probably, maybe, perhaps, quite possibly, approximately, not exactly but pretty close, 90% sure, responsible for climate change
- 100% chance of us never knowing why the full report is not being published until after Winter.
-------------
I should point out that I'm not attacking the idea of studying the global warming trend/issue/crisis (select one), but how awfully ugly and politicized it has become.
-------------
- Zero (0) explanations for past global coolings, warmings, and the GIC.
- 9 'forcings', that is, things that are causing the temperature to rise, as identified in the report. 6 of these 'forcings' are only 'medium to poorly' researched and understood. People are going to be quite upset if global warming does not produce the terrible effects we've been promised to experience in the next few years, especially since 'cc' has utterly demolished the issues of biodiversity, mass deforestation and marine polluting.
- Tempature is now predicted to increase 3 degrees in the next century, rather than 3.5 degrees as was originally claimed in the previous IPCC report
- Sea levels may rise up to 17 inches, down from 'at least between 20 and 30' from the previous report
- N/A to the infamous hockey stick graph, published as fact in the first IPCC, and then used to club 'cc' deniers into submission, until that is everyone realised it was a bunch of phooey
- Humans actions are probably, maybe, perhaps, quite possibly, approximately, not exactly but pretty close, 90% sure, responsible for climate change
- 100% chance of us never knowing why the full report is not being published until after Winter.
-------------
I should point out that I'm not attacking the idea of studying the global warming trend/issue/crisis (select one), but how awfully ugly and politicized it has become.
-------------
- Zero (0) explanations for past global coolings, warmings, and the GIC.
- 9 'forcings', that is, things that are causing the temperature to rise, as identified in the report. 6 of these 'forcings' are only 'medium to poorly' researched and understood. People are going to be quite upset if global warming does not produce the terrible effects we've been promised to experience in the next few years, especially since 'cc' has utterly demolished the issues of biodiversity, mass deforestation and marine polluting.
Global Warming for Christians
Somewhere in Genesis, God tells Adam and Eve that they would be stewards of the earth. In some circles, it is common to conclude that generally speaking, Christians have forgotten this rule (I think a more compelling argument would be that most humans have forgotten this rule). My climate studying friend reminds me of the Christian duty to the Earth, which is of course to make sure we don't ruin it. She even tells me that a retired member of the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) has devoted himself to admonishing Christendom in hope of raising awareness of our collective Christian ecological footprint.
All this is in response to my posting that the Canadian government has spent 6 billion dollars on global warming research in the past decade. Canadians, we're told, are amongst the worst polluters as far as greenhouse gas emissions go. And while the government was spending on 'cc' research, Canadians were polluting more and more. Infamously, the former Liberal government spent hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars during this period; not on research, but on propaganda aimed at convincing Canadians that they were in fact doing something.
So anyway, do I think it was wrong of the government to spend so much money on such a contestable and poorly understood issue as Climate Change? I don't think it was. I am happy to live in a country that is willing to spend billions of dollars on an essentially conservative issue. What I do have trouble with, is that by spending so much money, the Canadian government has in effect created a niche-economy-market-whathaveyou. There is no so much money (and so many professional reputations) tied up with debating climate change, that the basic honest principles of inquiry are being trampled in the name of the dollar. Plus, with the media playing such a massive role in promoting the profiles of 'cc' politicians (Gore) and scientists (Prior), we have in effect a terrifc leviathan which is placing severe limitations on boundaries and depth of the global warming conversation.
And as a post-script, I've long believed that a society which rejects social conservatism will reject environmental conservatism as well.
All this is in response to my posting that the Canadian government has spent 6 billion dollars on global warming research in the past decade. Canadians, we're told, are amongst the worst polluters as far as greenhouse gas emissions go. And while the government was spending on 'cc' research, Canadians were polluting more and more. Infamously, the former Liberal government spent hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars during this period; not on research, but on propaganda aimed at convincing Canadians that they were in fact doing something.
So anyway, do I think it was wrong of the government to spend so much money on such a contestable and poorly understood issue as Climate Change? I don't think it was. I am happy to live in a country that is willing to spend billions of dollars on an essentially conservative issue. What I do have trouble with, is that by spending so much money, the Canadian government has in effect created a niche-economy-market-whathaveyou. There is no so much money (and so many professional reputations) tied up with debating climate change, that the basic honest principles of inquiry are being trampled in the name of the dollar. Plus, with the media playing such a massive role in promoting the profiles of 'cc' politicians (Gore) and scientists (Prior), we have in effect a terrifc leviathan which is placing severe limitations on boundaries and depth of the global warming conversation.
And as a post-script, I've long believed that a society which rejects social conservatism will reject environmental conservatism as well.
Monday, February 05, 2007
How Many Climatogolists...
... does it take to cool the planet?
Amoung other interesting facts coming to light in the wake of the 'definitive' IPCC released last week: Canada has spent over 6 billion taxpayer dollars on climate change research since 1997.
Amoung other interesting facts coming to light in the wake of the 'definitive' IPCC released last week: Canada has spent over 6 billion taxpayer dollars on climate change research since 1997.
One Step Forward; One Step Backward
Our Diocese is finally clear of the Lacey Land dispute.
But some parishoners are angry that our Bishop removing a delinquent priest.
Never a dull moment in the Catholic Church!
But some parishoners are angry that our Bishop removing a delinquent priest.
Never a dull moment in the Catholic Church!
Global Warming....
As analyzed by the infamous Mark Steyn:
"Alas, the science isn't so solid. In the '70s, it was predicting a new ice age. Then it switched to global warming. Now it prefers "climate change." If it's hot, that's a sign of "climate change." If it's cold, that's a sign of "climate change." If it's 53 with sunny periods and light showers, you need to grab an overnight bag and get outta there right now because "climate change" is accelerating out of control.
"Alas, the science isn't so solid. In the '70s, it was predicting a new ice age. Then it switched to global warming. Now it prefers "climate change." If it's hot, that's a sign of "climate change." If it's cold, that's a sign of "climate change." If it's 53 with sunny periods and light showers, you need to grab an overnight bag and get outta there right now because "climate change" is accelerating out of control.
The silliest argument is the anecdotal one: "You only have to look outside your window to see that climate change is happening." Outside my window in northern New England last week, it was minus 20 Fahrenheit. Very cold. Must be the old climate change kicking in, right? After all, December was very mild. Which was itself a sign of climate change. A few years ago, the little old lady who served as my town's historian for many decades combed over the farmers' diaries from two centuries ago that various neighbors had donated to her: From the daily records of 15 Januarys, she concluded that three were what we'd now regard as classic New Hampshire winters, ideal for lumbering or winter sports; eight had January thaws, and four had no snow at all. This was in the pre-industrial 18th century."
The rest is here.
Thursday, February 01, 2007
Websites Worth Visiting
An update to the side bar has been made.
Soconblogs.com is a listing of socially conservative blogs worth visiting. I think everyone's Canadian too.
The People's Cube is one of the best and most creative websites I've ever found.
Mark Steyn is an author/commentator/arts critic of some infamy. Always interesting, and he's Canadian.
Soconblogs.com is a listing of socially conservative blogs worth visiting. I think everyone's Canadian too.
The People's Cube is one of the best and most creative websites I've ever found.
Mark Steyn is an author/commentator/arts critic of some infamy. Always interesting, and he's Canadian.
Island Catholic News and Impartiality
Just this morning I stumbled across a free 'c'atholic newspaper while dropping off some mail. It was the Island Catholic News, a living relic of 20th Century Canadian Catholicism. In all honesty, I cannot say that I approached the newspaper with an impartial lense. I had heard stories of it being one of the few remaning 'Catholic newspapers' that had a parish circulation of zero, similar in a way to the group Catholics for a Free Choice, which also suffers from a subscription deficit in its own way.
Some gems from this issue:
'George Weigel Reviled by Progressive Catholics for Pro-war Imperialist Writings' - The sub-title to the linked article.
'The deeper question is the rise of right wing politics and theology in the Catholic church here in Victoria and worldwide, since the election of Pope Benedict XVI.' - Ah, yes, the seizure of the Church by Ratzinger and his army of neo-cons. I hadn't seen that one in print for a while.
'The very choice of Edith Stein as the patron of the group is polemical. A Jewish convert to Catholicism is hardly a sensitive choice in an era of interfaith possibilities. ' - An Era of Interfaith Possibilities... You can't make this stuff up.
'He [George Weigel] is also not an entirely honest intellectual.' - Oh my! Proof?
'John Paul II may have manifested various sorts of inconsistencies and contradictions in his era as pope but he was consistently if not radically strong in his critique of what George Weigel is more than fond of pushing: War making and American capitalist imperialism.' - Oddly enough, Weigel and JP2 were good friends. Methinks this author hasn't left the island in quite some time.
'Have they been taken advantage of or are they fellow travelers of this Opus Dei style of spirituality?' - I'm not sure what's worse: The sentence or the Dan Brown influence.
'His current program is to ride the coattails of the present pope who is probably more to his liking politically, although Benedict too opposes the American policy in the Middle East. It will be interesting to see how Weigel manipulates all that to his own perspective.' - Yes... because his ulitimate plan is to rule the world.
'As I ponder the barbarity, criminality and foolishness of the execution of Saddam Hussein, I wonder why the notorious American Catholic neo-con dissenter George Weigel was invited by a group headed by the Rector of St. Andrew’s Cathedral to speak in September. ' - ICN reader number 2 of 7 Greg Hartnell 'weighs' in. Apparently Weigel is 'notorious' and Hussein is not?
Watch this space for more in the future.
Some gems from this issue:
'George Weigel Reviled by Progressive Catholics for Pro-war Imperialist Writings' - The sub-title to the linked article.
'The deeper question is the rise of right wing politics and theology in the Catholic church here in Victoria and worldwide, since the election of Pope Benedict XVI.' - Ah, yes, the seizure of the Church by Ratzinger and his army of neo-cons. I hadn't seen that one in print for a while.
'The very choice of Edith Stein as the patron of the group is polemical. A Jewish convert to Catholicism is hardly a sensitive choice in an era of interfaith possibilities. ' - An Era of Interfaith Possibilities... You can't make this stuff up.
'He [George Weigel] is also not an entirely honest intellectual.' - Oh my! Proof?
'John Paul II may have manifested various sorts of inconsistencies and contradictions in his era as pope but he was consistently if not radically strong in his critique of what George Weigel is more than fond of pushing: War making and American capitalist imperialism.' - Oddly enough, Weigel and JP2 were good friends. Methinks this author hasn't left the island in quite some time.
'Have they been taken advantage of or are they fellow travelers of this Opus Dei style of spirituality?' - I'm not sure what's worse: The sentence or the Dan Brown influence.
'His current program is to ride the coattails of the present pope who is probably more to his liking politically, although Benedict too opposes the American policy in the Middle East. It will be interesting to see how Weigel manipulates all that to his own perspective.' - Yes... because his ulitimate plan is to rule the world.
'As I ponder the barbarity, criminality and foolishness of the execution of Saddam Hussein, I wonder why the notorious American Catholic neo-con dissenter George Weigel was invited by a group headed by the Rector of St. Andrew’s Cathedral to speak in September. ' - ICN reader number 2 of 7 Greg Hartnell 'weighs' in. Apparently Weigel is 'notorious' and Hussein is not?
Watch this space for more in the future.
Priest Disappears; Diocese Confused
Last week, I heard about controversy brewing in a little parish of the Vancouver Island Diocese. Apparently there was some division over the dismissal of a parish employee, and the parish priest had up and left. The diocese was unable to comment, but for a private letter read to the parish after Sunday Mass.
According to the Globe & Mail (who do us the favour of quoting Peter Jamieson, of the unread and undistributed 'Island Catholic News') the parish employee in question had offended the sensibilities of 'conservative' members of the parish, who in turn petitioned the bishop to remove the employee. Seemingly in protest, the parish priest up and left this past Friday.
It's hard to comment based on the rather one-sided account presented in the article, but I can say from what I have learned about the way the priest ran this parish, his departure can bring nothing but good.
According to the Globe & Mail (who do us the favour of quoting Peter Jamieson, of the unread and undistributed 'Island Catholic News') the parish employee in question had offended the sensibilities of 'conservative' members of the parish, who in turn petitioned the bishop to remove the employee. Seemingly in protest, the parish priest up and left this past Friday.
It's hard to comment based on the rather one-sided account presented in the article, but I can say from what I have learned about the way the priest ran this parish, his departure can bring nothing but good.
Vancouver Island Diocese Finally Gets a Break
Thanks, God. Prayers answered in a serious way. It looks like the ordeal might finally be over. This means the diocese does not have to worry about selling off any more land or closing any churches. Hopefully Mr. Finley accepts the court's ruling and gets on with his life.
Carolyn Heiman, Times ColonistPublished: Thursday, February 01, 2007
The Catholic Diocese of Victoria got some good news yesterday when it
learned an $8.5-million judgment made against it in 2005 has been
overturned. The decision of the Washington State Court of Appeals
possibly signals the near end of a two-decade-long saga that cost the
diocese millions, forced the church to sell off property and borrow money
from parishioners. The events happened after an investment involving an
Arabian horse venture and a land project in Washington soured.In a unanimous decision, the Washington court reversed a
judgment made against the diocese in June 2005 after Seattle lawyer Joseph
Finley, who brought the diocese into the horse and land deal, sued for breach of
contract. According to a news release issued by the diocese, the higher
Washington court ruled that the diocese did not violate any duty to Finley,
and does not owe him any money, and that the case should have been dismissed
and never should have been presented to a jury.
Bishop Richard Gagnon was unavailable for comment. In a news release, he said: "This issue has diverted our attention for too long. I am hopeful that we, in the Catholic community on the Vancouver Island, can soon put this unfortunate incident behind us."The court case was triggered when the diocese stopped
interest payments on the property in Lacey, Wash., and the land went into
receivership. At one point the diocese was paying $200,000 monthly interest
on the debt. To eliminate the debt, the diocese launched a fundraising
campaign, issuing bonds at six per cent interest. Last fall, it paid off the
debentures. The diocese also sold off several properties on Vancouver
Island, raising $8 million. Finley could seek a review of the decision by
the Washington State Supreme Court. He could not be reached last night for
comment. It's not known how much the litigation has cost the diocese or
how much it remains in debt. Lawyer Paul Bundon, representing the diocese,
said he expects the bishop will give a full accounting to parishioners.
"Obviously the judgment has very much improved their financial
situation."
© Times Colonist (Victoria) 2007
Wednesday, January 31, 2007
Welcome to Horouxville
Is Horouxville xenophobic and/or un-Christian?
Most people seem to have decided that yes, those dam Quebeckers are as backwards as can possibly be. Comparisons have been drawn, almost immediately too, to the KKK, the Know-Nothings, and all the other sad examples of race/culture based prejudice. Jean Charest, the premier of Quebec, publically denounced the town and defended the rights of immigrants to express themselves.
The 'edict' or whatever is silly. It is heavy handed and it is offensive. But it is wrong? Canadians seem to forget that integration and inculturation are the most beneficial things most immigrants can hope to achieve. By this I mean following and respecting the norms of the society you find yourself living in. Japanese Canadians, for example, are the most successful non-white ethnic group as whole in Canada, far ahead of Indian, aboriginal, black, and other Asian groups. Why? Because after the Japanese ghettos were broken up post-WW2, Japanese people had to integrate into the larger, non-Japanese society.
Rather than condemn the residents of Horouxville, Canadians should really take this moment to stop and ponder what multi-culturalism really entails.
Most people seem to have decided that yes, those dam Quebeckers are as backwards as can possibly be. Comparisons have been drawn, almost immediately too, to the KKK, the Know-Nothings, and all the other sad examples of race/culture based prejudice. Jean Charest, the premier of Quebec, publically denounced the town and defended the rights of immigrants to express themselves.
The 'edict' or whatever is silly. It is heavy handed and it is offensive. But it is wrong? Canadians seem to forget that integration and inculturation are the most beneficial things most immigrants can hope to achieve. By this I mean following and respecting the norms of the society you find yourself living in. Japanese Canadians, for example, are the most successful non-white ethnic group as whole in Canada, far ahead of Indian, aboriginal, black, and other Asian groups. Why? Because after the Japanese ghettos were broken up post-WW2, Japanese people had to integrate into the larger, non-Japanese society.
Rather than condemn the residents of Horouxville, Canadians should really take this moment to stop and ponder what multi-culturalism really entails.
Monday, January 29, 2007
Kim/Tim, Your Life is Gonna Suck
Is Germany simply prone to artocities? A 12 year old boy, named Kim/Tim no less, according to the news reports, was so deeply convinced that he should be a female human that his 'doctor' had a duty to make sure he never became a man, even though he was/is biologically designed that way. The 'doctor' claims the boy is, and I quote directly, 'trapped in the wrong body'. Trapped in the wrong body.
Perhaps the most frightening part of the report is that doctors diagnosed the boy as a 'transsexual' 2 years ago, or better yet, when he was only 10. 10! Dare I suggest to this boy that he may have a massive future malpractice case on his hands if ever he recovers from the barbarous and inhumane 'treatment' being pushing upon him?
The entire situation reeks of something nastier than simply a confused boy (and ergo confused parents) making some unrealistically poor decisions. It's little more than a hypothesis, but from the surface, it looks as if a group of very zealous and very morally-detached researchers preyed upon this boy and his family. Guinea pig is hardly the term I would want to use, but what else can I say?
Prayers for this boy, his family, and the doctors.
Perhaps the most frightening part of the report is that doctors diagnosed the boy as a 'transsexual' 2 years ago, or better yet, when he was only 10. 10! Dare I suggest to this boy that he may have a massive future malpractice case on his hands if ever he recovers from the barbarous and inhumane 'treatment' being pushing upon him?
The entire situation reeks of something nastier than simply a confused boy (and ergo confused parents) making some unrealistically poor decisions. It's little more than a hypothesis, but from the surface, it looks as if a group of very zealous and very morally-detached researchers preyed upon this boy and his family. Guinea pig is hardly the term I would want to use, but what else can I say?
Prayers for this boy, his family, and the doctors.
Thursday, January 25, 2007
Brian Higgins and The Great Homily Diss
Trouble in little Buffalo. Apparently a local Catholic representative was admonished during Mass by a deacon for having supported the new embryonic funding bill in the House of Congress. This bill provides millions more in funding for the exploitation of embryos, singularly those embryos which are sitting in some sort of stasis at many of America's fertility clinics. Embryonic stem cell research involves the destruction of the embryos, and as a result is against the teachings of the Catholic Church.
So anyway, during the homily, the deacon accused made a comment that parishoners upset with the latest anti-life developments in Washington could take it up with Brian Higgins, the local representative who happened to be present during the Mass. After this, Higgins took his family and left Mass, apparently shocked and disgusted by the deacon's behaviour. The pastor and bishop rushed soon after to apologize to Higgins, and to public announce their intention to remonstrate the deacon.
Until the facts of the event come out in more detail, I won't comment.
So anyway, during the homily, the deacon accused made a comment that parishoners upset with the latest anti-life developments in Washington could take it up with Brian Higgins, the local representative who happened to be present during the Mass. After this, Higgins took his family and left Mass, apparently shocked and disgusted by the deacon's behaviour. The pastor and bishop rushed soon after to apologize to Higgins, and to public announce their intention to remonstrate the deacon.
Until the facts of the event come out in more detail, I won't comment.
Catholics for a Free Choice & The Rest
Call to Action.
DignityUSA.
Catholics for a Free Choice.
The Anglican/Episcopalian Church.
Each of these claim to represent Catholicism, each in differing degrees. Call to Action claims to represent the disaffected, disillusioned, and disenfranchised Catholics turned away by the Church's refusal to amend Her ways. DignityUSA claims to support those with homosexual tendencies who cannot (a) live as a faithful Catholic and (b) leave the Church. Catholics for a Free Choice claims, like Call to Action, to lobby for a 'liberalization' of the Church's eternal teachings, and also claims to represent a large number of people. Finally, the Anglican/Episcopalian Church defines itself as Catholic, sometimes with a capital 'c' and sometimes with a lower case 'c' - clarity not being one of its most noticeable features.
Of all of these groups, the only truly honest one is, !quelle surprise!, the Anglican/Episcopalian Church. Sure, every Catholic is well aware of the history of the Anglican Church, and has a right to disagree with my opinion, but at least the Anglicans formally left Catholicism when its leaders couldn't find the energy to hold fast to the Catholic (notice the large 'c') Church. The other groups, thus, while claiming to belong to the Catholic Church, don't really in reality.
By separating oneself from the Church on certain dogmas (which strangely enough, always seem to have something to do with sex), one begins to enter into the realm of Protestantism. Protestants, you see, are the honest Catholics who once upon again for whatever the reason decided that life was better when you cooked up your own recipe for eternal salvation and realised that such a philosophy was incompatible with Catholicism, and left. Call to Action, DignityUSA and CFFC on the other hand, are sort of Protestants in transition. They believe Protestant things, but don't believe that they're Protestants.
The problem lay Catholics face when approaching people involved or snared by these groups is that there is, or at least there has been, little support from local Church hierarchy. As I'm sure many Catholics will agree, most bishops appear more concerned with stepping on people's toes and PR than working to improve the spiritual health of their diocese. But this is beside the point, for these groups are lay run and in some cases lay funded. It is the role of the laity to make sure these groups are not able to put any more people in jeopardy.
How can we do this? Discussion and prayer.
DignityUSA.
Catholics for a Free Choice.
The Anglican/Episcopalian Church.
Each of these claim to represent Catholicism, each in differing degrees. Call to Action claims to represent the disaffected, disillusioned, and disenfranchised Catholics turned away by the Church's refusal to amend Her ways. DignityUSA claims to support those with homosexual tendencies who cannot (a) live as a faithful Catholic and (b) leave the Church. Catholics for a Free Choice claims, like Call to Action, to lobby for a 'liberalization' of the Church's eternal teachings, and also claims to represent a large number of people. Finally, the Anglican/Episcopalian Church defines itself as Catholic, sometimes with a capital 'c' and sometimes with a lower case 'c' - clarity not being one of its most noticeable features.
Of all of these groups, the only truly honest one is, !quelle surprise!, the Anglican/Episcopalian Church. Sure, every Catholic is well aware of the history of the Anglican Church, and has a right to disagree with my opinion, but at least the Anglicans formally left Catholicism when its leaders couldn't find the energy to hold fast to the Catholic (notice the large 'c') Church. The other groups, thus, while claiming to belong to the Catholic Church, don't really in reality.
By separating oneself from the Church on certain dogmas (which strangely enough, always seem to have something to do with sex), one begins to enter into the realm of Protestantism. Protestants, you see, are the honest Catholics who once upon again for whatever the reason decided that life was better when you cooked up your own recipe for eternal salvation and realised that such a philosophy was incompatible with Catholicism, and left. Call to Action, DignityUSA and CFFC on the other hand, are sort of Protestants in transition. They believe Protestant things, but don't believe that they're Protestants.
The problem lay Catholics face when approaching people involved or snared by these groups is that there is, or at least there has been, little support from local Church hierarchy. As I'm sure many Catholics will agree, most bishops appear more concerned with stepping on people's toes and PR than working to improve the spiritual health of their diocese. But this is beside the point, for these groups are lay run and in some cases lay funded. It is the role of the laity to make sure these groups are not able to put any more people in jeopardy.
How can we do this? Discussion and prayer.
Wednesday, January 24, 2007
Photos of the Walk for Life March
Please visit here for eighty or so pictures of the march.
FYI: The Walk for Life is the largest march in Washington, each year, without exception. So why is it that its rarely covered by the national and major media outlets?
FYI: The Walk for Life is the largest march in Washington, each year, without exception. So why is it that its rarely covered by the national and major media outlets?
Suicide, End of Life, and Sacrifice
Once a week, my wife and I and a friend attend an adult catechetics class offered by my local parish. We're very blessed to have an emeritus professor of history run the course, which means all the lectures are informative and enlightening, and the concluding discussions fruitful. Anyway, last night we discussed the differences between suicide, refusing extraordinary treatments to prolong life, and acceptable sacrifice. And God being a providential God, I read the following this morning at The Cafeteria is Closed Blog:
(2) The man was being kept alive by a respirator.
(3) The man had frequently requested that his life be ended.
(4) Death was procured by the doctor removing the man from the respirator.
Catholic doctrine, according to the Catechism, clearly states that no person man make an act which results in definite death. Such an act not only endangers our soul, but it also endangers the soul of any person who participates in the death, such as the doctor in this case. The Catechism however also states that a person may refuse 'extraordinary' treatments which prolong death. Can a respirator be considered 'extraordinary' treatment?
The respirator question, I think, is something of a red herring. The key to this problem is, once again, intentionality. It is clear from the news reports and the reaction of the Church that the suffering man had made it clear that he sought to end his life. This is akin to suicide, and thus the Church made the correct, however unpopular, decision to not afford this man a Catholic funeral.
ROME: The Vatican's rigid opposition to euthanasia has come under fire from within its own ranks after it denied a religious funeral to a paralysed man who had asked to be removed from a life-saving respirator.
The influential former archbishop of Milan, Cardinal Carlo Maria Martini, said on Sunday that terminally ill patients should be given the right to refuse treatments and that the doctors who assist them should be protected by law.
Now the case in questions concerns a Italian man suffering from muscular dystrophy who was being kept alive by a respirator. The Church denied him a Catholic funeral, saying that he had frequently publicly expressed a desire to end his life, and thus clearly opposed Catholic doctrine. Since many people, and I'm assuming that also means most Italians, don't know the Church's stance on end of life questions, some clarification is in order. But let's organize the facts first:
(1) A man was suffering from a terminal illness.(2) The man was being kept alive by a respirator.
(3) The man had frequently requested that his life be ended.
(4) Death was procured by the doctor removing the man from the respirator.
Catholic doctrine, according to the Catechism, clearly states that no person man make an act which results in definite death. Such an act not only endangers our soul, but it also endangers the soul of any person who participates in the death, such as the doctor in this case. The Catechism however also states that a person may refuse 'extraordinary' treatments which prolong death. Can a respirator be considered 'extraordinary' treatment?
The respirator question, I think, is something of a red herring. The key to this problem is, once again, intentionality. It is clear from the news reports and the reaction of the Church that the suffering man had made it clear that he sought to end his life. This is akin to suicide, and thus the Church made the correct, however unpopular, decision to not afford this man a Catholic funeral.
Monday, January 22, 2007
But Christians Aren't Persecuted!
... Some of my high school friends used to say when we'd discuss the problems and plights of the world. My mum had shocked at age 12 when she told me that more Christians had been persecuted and martyred in the 20th Century than in any other, combined! My fellow cradle-Catholic friends, 'educated' by the venerable the World Is Good So Let's All Have Fun philosophy which dominated, and probably still dominates the various Catholic education systems of the West, didn't like to think that it was Christians who were being sh*t on. Animists, Muslims, Buddhists, Taoists - those were the folks who really needed our help.
Well they can now considered themselves shocked. A recently leaked document from the Burmese government calls for the eradication of Christianity, ergo Christians too, from the country. The article I've linked states that this is part of a larger agenda of the Burmese government to make a 'pure' country, which doesn't sound at all unsimilar to those of us with good memories. The VainGlorious Fuhrer wanted to do the same thing, and did, in Germany 70 years ago. Prayers for all those living in Burma.
Well they can now considered themselves shocked. A recently leaked document from the Burmese government calls for the eradication of Christianity, ergo Christians too, from the country. The article I've linked states that this is part of a larger agenda of the Burmese government to make a 'pure' country, which doesn't sound at all unsimilar to those of us with good memories. The VainGlorious Fuhrer wanted to do the same thing, and did, in Germany 70 years ago. Prayers for all those living in Burma.
A Few More Thoughts on Obama
.... Who wins the award for most multicultural and politically correct president candidate.
Seriously, the more I read about Obama, the less and less I think he is suited for the top political position of the Western, Eastern, Northern and Southern World. Going back to what we know about him:
- He's a deep blue Democrat, though not as radical as the current party leaders
- He's from a Muslim background, but is a Christian Congregationalist
- He entered politics back in 1996, but has only had noticeable success since 2002
And that's it. Obama has less than 10 years experience working in the public office, never in a position of any authority, and he's expected to be the Democrat's best hope for retaking the presidency?
My final reaction is this: If Americans elect Obama, it will be because of some sort of reverse racism which is clouding their judgement. American are so eager to prove to the world that they are no longer racist, or better yet, that they as a nation are actually just as progressive as the media, academia and elite cliques wish they were, that they will elect a man with little experience or knowledge of global, or even domestic, politics to the presidency.
GW Bush was/is a bad president. Obama will be worse.
Seriously, the more I read about Obama, the less and less I think he is suited for the top political position of the Western, Eastern, Northern and Southern World. Going back to what we know about him:
- He's a deep blue Democrat, though not as radical as the current party leaders
- He's from a Muslim background, but is a Christian Congregationalist
- He entered politics back in 1996, but has only had noticeable success since 2002
And that's it. Obama has less than 10 years experience working in the public office, never in a position of any authority, and he's expected to be the Democrat's best hope for retaking the presidency?
My final reaction is this: If Americans elect Obama, it will be because of some sort of reverse racism which is clouding their judgement. American are so eager to prove to the world that they are no longer racist, or better yet, that they as a nation are actually just as progressive as the media, academia and elite cliques wish they were, that they will elect a man with little experience or knowledge of global, or even domestic, politics to the presidency.
GW Bush was/is a bad president. Obama will be worse.
Thursday, January 18, 2007
Little Dudko on the Prairie
h/t to Kian on the title of this post.
The last time the CBC spent so much money advertising a show, it had to do with Canadian things, like rubber pucks, gritty tape, thin ice and Swedish millionaires. But this is the latter half of the first decade of the new millenium, and being as cutting edge as CBC naturally is, we have Little Mosque on the Prairie instead. Korans, abrogated verses and polygamy are not Canadian things, however they are destined to grab people's attention until the Islam vs. Everybody war is finally settled.
For that reason alone, Little Mosque on the Prairie isn't a poor choice as a flagship show for an increasingly embattled and irrelevant TV-station. The CBC hasn't drawn serious audiences for any of its programs, other than Hockey Night in Canada, for many years. A solution had to be found, and fresh off the foiled homegrown-Islamist attack of the past summer, and the 249 or so reported Islamist attacks which occurred in December 2006, the 'clever' heads at CBC had the perfect environment to run Little Mosque.
Now a television show depicting the lives of Muslims in an overwhelmingly Christian nation would be fun, since Islam demands so much of its adherents that alienates them from their surrounding culture. Imagine the hilarity of a Muslim boy accidently eating goat or pig at a birthday party! Or the smiles to be had after Upajj, the 2nd wife, finds her husband, Muhamed Mohammad Muhamad, in perverse coitus with Faturash, the 8th wife!
According to cbcwatch, Little Mosque pulled in 2,100,000 viewers for its debut 2 Mondays ago, a good showing for a Canadian program. But then this past week, the CBC decided to rerun the debut show on Monday, rather than the next episode as promised. The rerun still gathered about 600,000, which is pretty good, considered that the much hyped The Hour with George Strombo didn't even top that for its net ratings of 2006.
But anyways, the problems with Little Mosque became readily apparent after the first five minutes. The Muslims you see, are simply portrayed as misunderstood people. Typical Canadians are rascist, xenophobic, hypocritical and bigoted people whose pedantry prevents them from realizes who joyfully wonderful these Muslims really are. The message is, Muslims don't have a problem integrating into Canada, Canadians have a problem integrating Muslims into Canada.
The last time the CBC spent so much money advertising a show, it had to do with Canadian things, like rubber pucks, gritty tape, thin ice and Swedish millionaires. But this is the latter half of the first decade of the new millenium, and being as cutting edge as CBC naturally is, we have Little Mosque on the Prairie instead. Korans, abrogated verses and polygamy are not Canadian things, however they are destined to grab people's attention until the Islam vs. Everybody war is finally settled.
For that reason alone, Little Mosque on the Prairie isn't a poor choice as a flagship show for an increasingly embattled and irrelevant TV-station. The CBC hasn't drawn serious audiences for any of its programs, other than Hockey Night in Canada, for many years. A solution had to be found, and fresh off the foiled homegrown-Islamist attack of the past summer, and the 249 or so reported Islamist attacks which occurred in December 2006, the 'clever' heads at CBC had the perfect environment to run Little Mosque.
Now a television show depicting the lives of Muslims in an overwhelmingly Christian nation would be fun, since Islam demands so much of its adherents that alienates them from their surrounding culture. Imagine the hilarity of a Muslim boy accidently eating goat or pig at a birthday party! Or the smiles to be had after Upajj, the 2nd wife, finds her husband, Muhamed Mohammad Muhamad, in perverse coitus with Faturash, the 8th wife!
According to cbcwatch, Little Mosque pulled in 2,100,000 viewers for its debut 2 Mondays ago, a good showing for a Canadian program. But then this past week, the CBC decided to rerun the debut show on Monday, rather than the next episode as promised. The rerun still gathered about 600,000, which is pretty good, considered that the much hyped The Hour with George Strombo didn't even top that for its net ratings of 2006.
But anyways, the problems with Little Mosque became readily apparent after the first five minutes. The Muslims you see, are simply portrayed as misunderstood people. Typical Canadians are rascist, xenophobic, hypocritical and bigoted people whose pedantry prevents them from realizes who joyfully wonderful these Muslims really are. The message is, Muslims don't have a problem integrating into Canada, Canadians have a problem integrating Muslims into Canada.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)