Saturday, August 30, 2008
Maybe if their government worked more on public works projects instead of computers, and maybe if certain citizenry worked more on rescue and relief rather than raping, setting on fire, beating and killing Christians, maybe things would be better? Just a thought.
Maybe the rapists should be taken to temples of Kali and have their willies cut off. Then they can board boats painted with skulls and join in the rescue work.
Chairman of Supreme Judiciary Council congratulates Muslim nation on holy month of Ramadan
Taif, Saudi Arabia, , August 30, SPA--The Chairman of Supreme Judiciary Council Sheikh Saleh bin Mohammad Allehaidan has congratulated the Muslim nation on the holy month of Ramadan, praying to Almighty Allah for all success for the Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques King Abdullah bin Abdulaziz Al Saud, the Saudi people and Muslims.
In a speech on the advent of the holy month of Ramadan on Monday, Sheikh Saleh praised Almighty Allah for making the starts and ends of worships connected with matters and cosmic signs obvious to everyone, pointing out that a lunar crescent can be seen by all people to determine the start of fasting and at the end of the month to break fasting. In conclusion, he prayed to Almighty Allah for glory for Islam and Muslims and for their protection from the evils of their enemies.
I echo the words and sentiments of Sheikh Saheh.
I also want to point out that he explains that the lunar crescent is used so that all people have a way to determine Allah's will for starting and ending worship. This is because all people, rich or poor, learned or illiterate, could look at the sky and share the same clock, provided by God.
This is one reason that the Catholic Church developed the art of stained glass windows in churches to tell the story of Jesus. Rich or poor, learned or illiterate, all could gaze on the windows and understand, knowing the story of Jesus, of Mary, of all the saints, and of God's works on earth. Churches used to be unlocked and open all the time so any, no matter how poor, could come in and learn and pray.
This is quite different from the idolatry of astrology and other occult and arcane arts, who seek to undermine the will of God by claiming manipulation of the "signs" by the few, wealthy and powerful. That is an abomination to God.
Friday, August 29, 2008
In the name of God, the Lord of Grace, the Ever Merciful
As for the unbelievers, the fire of hell awaits them. No term shall be determined for them so that they could die, nor shall its suffering be reduced for them. Thus shall We requite all unbelievers. There they will cry aloud: ‘Our Lord! Let us out and we will do good, not like what we did before.’ ‘Have We not given you lives long enough for anyone who would be warned to take warning? And a warner had come to you. Taste it, then. Wrongdoers shall have none to support them.’ God knows all that is hidden in the heavens and earth; He fully knows what is in people’s hearts.
It is He who made you inherit the earth. Hence, anyone who denies the truth will bear the consequences of his unbelief. In denying Him the unbelievers will have nothing but an increase of their loathsomeness in God’s sight; and in denying Him the unbelievers will only add to their loss.
(The Originator, Fatir, 35: 36-39)
“God knows all that is hidden in the heavens and earth; He fully knows what is in people’s hearts.”
It is God who knows everything in the universe and what is in people’s hearts. On the basis of His knowledge, He judges all matters.
The surah concludes with a warning that should strike fear in people’s hearts. It tells them that if God were to punish people immediately for what they incur, no one would remain on the face of the earth. It behoves us then, to acknowledge God’s grace in allowing us time to reflect and consider our position.
By the way, notice the part where they try to force the priest to rape the nun (after she had already been thoroughly raped by the pig gang). That's a favorite Nazi torture, to force family members to rape each other, you know, mother-son, brother-sister. Nazis really dug that. Guess the Hindus are channeling Nazis now.
Father Chellen said he fled through the backyard with another priest and a nun."It was heartbreaking for us to watch from a distance the entire complex go up in smoke," said Father Chellen, who had supervised the construction of the center that opened in 2001 and could accommodate 200 people.
"They vandalized everything and set it on fire. It has been reduced to ashes," he added.
The following morning, he said, the Hindu family moved the priest and nun to an adjacent vacant house and locked it to give the impression that no one was inside.
However, the Hindu mobs overheard the priest speaking on his cell phone, broke into the room and dragged him and the nun outside."They began our crucifixion parade," said Father Chellen. The gang of about 50 armed Hindus "beat us up and led us like culprits along the road" to the burned pastoral center.
"There they tore my shirt and started pulling off the clothes of the nun. When I protested, they beat me hard with iron rods. Later, they took the sister inside (and) raped her while they went on kicking and teasing me, forcing (me) to say vulgar words," said the priest who has cuts, bruises and swollen tissue all over his body and stitches on his face.
"Later both of us, half-naked, were taken to the street, and they ordered me to have sex with the nun in public, saying nuns and priests do it. As I refused, they went on beating me and dragged us to the nearby government office. Sadly, a dozen policemen were watching all this," he said.Angry at his plea to the police for help, the mob beat the bleeding priest again.
Later, a government official and members of the mob took the priest and the nun to the police station, where Father Chellen said he was kicked in the face.
"The four-hour ordeal ended when a senior police officer arrived in the evening," said Father Chellen. The priest said one of the most hurtful things about the incident was that some local Hindus whom he knew were watching the events and ignored his requests for help.
Later, the priest and nun were taken to a nearby police camp, he said."They were very kind to us, gave us clothes and slippers," said Father Chellen.On Aug. 26, the priest and the nun were taken for medical tests. That afternoon they were sent by bus to Bhubaneswar.Father Chellen said he was admitted to the hospital Aug. 27, while the traumatized nun was taken to a convent. He said the plans called for him to be moved to Mumbai for treatment.
Asked about the how the nun coped with the trauma, Father Chellen said: "We had no option and were simply following their commands. We resisted as much as we could. This is like being tortured for Christ."END
I pray to God to send hellfire to all who participated and sympathized with the persecution, and I pray that if not hellfire in life that they spend an eternity in hell for what they have done. NO MERCY.
1) If someone is intelligent, flexible and of high moral fiber, there is no job they cannot do, including the Presidency. When one has a foundation that is firm, one can make decisions off of that. In evidence I offer the Founding Fathers. Absolutely all they had was the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, since when the country was new, obviously no one had "presidential experience." Yet from the Founding Fathers who had only a firm vision of a republic based in democracy, a piece of paper, and state militias sprang one President after the other in the first days of the United States. The only thing they had in common as "experience" was being a landowner. For most of human history being a landowner was the basis of all political office and "experience."
2) During the "women's liberation" movement, there were few women of "experience," in either politics or academia, or in industry, or high technology positions. Yet no one made women "wait to get their promotions until they have the same experience as men" once the glass ceilings were broken. To "wait" for the "same" or "comparable experience" promotes a kind of mindset that ensures that the pace of the disenfranchised group always remains behind. Women, blacks, Native Americans, etc cannot "wait" until they have exactly comparable years and type of experience as men who have held an office. This is especially outrageous when an "inexperienced" but moral and intelligent candidate is denigrated compared to a "experienced" leader who has made repeated and often immoral mistakes. Do you keep voting a corrupt politician back into office because he or she "has more experience" than the challenging candidate? Think about it.
3) Women's groups back in the 1960's-1980's promised that one of the "benefits" of more women candidates would be a higher morality and more compassion. The most hardened shrew bra burning hippies would even say this. Now they have drawn away from that position because they have discovered that morality implies self control and boundaries on behavior. Thus they have totally reneged on their promise of promoting "more compassionate and moral" women leaders, and instead push those that support tax and spend, hedonism, anti-religion, and self absorption rather than constancy and patriotism. So the very radical "women's libbers" promised more compassion and morality from women candidates and have for the past twenty five years totally run from (and worked against) this model of candidate. Witness their reaction to Sarah Palin.
Let's be honest. Many on the radical left, which controls the Democratic Party and the media, mix up compassion with hedonism. They do not recognize compassion when they see it. A woman like Sarah Palin has five children, including one with a disability that was known of pre-birth, and they act like she's hard hearted. Yet you know that many women these radicals push as "compassionate" would have happily had five abortions. How ironic that five abortions would be viewed as "more compassionate" than five living and loved children in a traditional family setting. If that does not tell you more about what this country has come to, I don't know what will open your eyes.
4) I'm already tired of the "how will she stand up against Putin" and "she won't have respect in the Middle East." Wrong. Here's why. We've had Secretary Rice "Russian expert" for four years or whatever, and what has she given us in foreign policy and respect? Wow, she sure put those Russians and Middle East sheiks in their place. *Yawn.* And how about the Middle East? Many in positions of power are Emirs, Princes, Sheiks, who received their office through tribal and familial position and status. They will respect a moral woman who has many children in a traditional marriage far more than you realize. And this includes the terrorists, by the way, who are often reactionaries against what they view as depraved Western moral values (gee, I wonder why they think that?)
I think many men (and women) have been brainwashed by a false ideal of what "foreign policy experience" really is in truth. Being a wonk and having "traveled the world" does not provide good foreign policy or respect among leaders from different cultures. Yet that idea is pushed over and over even though any dummy can see the repeated failed results in both parties who provide "experienced" UN Ambassadors and Secretaries of States. Most of them have been TERRIBLE and you'd have to be dumb to not see how respect and results have not come from "experience."
5) Many are repelled by her pro life position (and that tells you how much abortion has become the number one hobby and sacrament among liberals, rather than cultivating and nurturing the having of children in stable loving settings). And those people will not vote for anyone pro-life, even if they have no ability to wave a magic wand and turn back time. Yet the other side is expected to be mature and vote for anti life candidates, because we are expected to look at the overall candidate's offerings. So the anti life people get to be "single issue" while accusing the pro life people of being "single issue." For example, I have voted for anti life candidates because I have assessed that they were the person I wanted to vote for at that time in that office, and knowing realistically that they will not "make abortion worse" than it already is due to the public's addition to abortion and lack of familial responsibility and context. So I act like a grown up adult and not vote single issue, yet any pro-life candidate (especially a woman) is instantly rejected with disgust by many of these fanatics rather than admiration! It boggles my mind.
6) I supported Geraldine Ferraro when she was the first nominated Vice President female candidate in 1984 and I voted for her ticket. (I even have her autograph on an engraving from an environmental fund raising benefit). And what was she attacked for during her candidacy? "Lack of foreign policy experience." She was mightily dismissed and patronized to and I hear already THE SAME WORDS, but this time from WOMEN TOO, in the first reactions to Governor Palin from the Democrats. They are saying about Governor Palin the exact same thing I heard throughout the campaign against Rep Ferraro. I tell you, they have no shame.
7) I supported Jimmy Carter when he ran for President, in large part because he had something I liked seeing, which is military experience (submarine service in his case). His terrible management of all military endeavors have put me off of looking for "military experience" in the resumes of Presidential candidates (although I am glad for Senator McCain's honorable service and the high price he paid).
Again, Jimmy Carter is an example of having "experience" in an area is often a boomerang, where they end up being terrible because they think they understand something and they do not. Young people do not remember that Carter tried to "rescue" the embassy hostages in Iran by sending helicopters into a nighttime desert storm with no preparation or understanding of combat and evacuation in a desert setting (something we now have lots of experience in now).
8) I am so annoyed with the obsessing about Senator McCain "dying in office." What if all of you had totally wasted the eight years that Ronald Reagan served as President by obsessing that he would "die in office" and thus only paid attention to the Vice President? And President Clinton had his serious heart ailment just a few years ago; what if that had happened when he was traveling, in office, perhaps had been worse? Would anyone have predicted that based on his age? (Maybe from his affinity for fast food, which was a topic of humor that became tiresome too). All I am saying that this strange culture of death has made people obsessed with "being ready" for someone dying rather than looking at what is actually happening and having some faith that people set into roles that they are suddenly called upon to serve. It's not like they are all alone on a tennis court in a match. Through generations of humanity people have stepped into huge roles when suddenly called to do so, by their country, by their faith, or by their family's needs. It's amazing how much people come through in a pinch, and it's a sign of the depressive negativity of western culture today that no one seems to understand that. (Yet Americans expect people in other countries to throw incumbents out of office that they don't like, and just assume the successor will be "acceptable," "experience" or not).
In a way, Catholics have a better understanding of this because they relate to the sudden thrusting of the office of the Pope onto a cardinal during an enclave, and who truly knows who is "ready" from "experience" to be the Vicar of Christ? Only God, and God sees them through when each candidate in turn receives that office. I wish people would be less arrogant about "qualifications" and more trusting of human character and the ability to step up to a calling or a challenge.
9) Being a fiscal conservative by definition gives a man or a woman a strong leg up in having good judgment. Thus, Governor Palin's strong fiscal conservatism and her stance about ethics in spending will, by definition, be the framework for great decision making that others who lack fiscal conservatism and ethics but have "more experience" lack. Why is this? Think about the family budget. If you have to make hard choices about spending you tend to be more thoughtful about cost and benefit, and the consequences of a bad investment. Tax and spend liberals think they can buy their way out of every problem, and spend little time thinking about consequences of their fiscal decisions. I would take a no experience fiscal conservative over a twenty year tax and spend liberal any day of the week. And Governor Palin has experience, so there you go, figure it out.
10) She has a realistic balance between understanding consuming of natural resources and conservation of natural resources and you better believe that this balance in understanding is alarmingly rare nowadays. This is where hobbies, pastimes and lifestyle are assets even if they are not "experience." The first generations of effective conservationists were farmers, hunters, and other consumers of natural resources who also understood how to preserve and enhance our planet and its ecosystems. Many who claim to be "green" today are so wrapped in plastic and lack genuine understanding of how humans are part of the ecosystem, yes, but also are at the top of the pyramid. Many "greens" today would shudder at actually getting their hands dirty, and thus lack an understanding of some of the realities of life. I grew up with the generation of environmentalists who actually viewed themselves as being alive and part of the ecosystems as both stewards and consumers. I've seen that generation replaced with a very freaky intellectual view of being "green" that is anti-human and also totally ineffective in doing the dirty work to protect the environment (like building sewage treatment plants; they'd rather worry about carbon in the air than actually take care of real problems that are not so glamorous and certainly do not offer money mining opportunities through scams like "carbon credits.") The oceans are dying because people won't build toilets for a billion people and to control wastewater and run off but boy oh boy, they want to jet around lecturing about a theoretical problem with carbon while cashing in on it. Governor Palin's lifestyle shows that she has the balance and understanding just right and that is a very rare commodity that cannot be measured as "experience," but is in truth even better than what passes for modern day plasticized "experience."
I hope that you find this helpful.
Thursday, August 28, 2008
Anyway, I found this blogspot that has one half of the pamphlet in digital form, and I thought you might like to read it. The Green Scapular has always been and remains a dear sign of devotion for me.
Cardinal Urges Devotion to Rosary and Scapular
Archbishop of Lima Puts Evangelization in Mary
LIMA, Peru, JULY 17, 2008 (Zenit.org).- Peruvian Cardinal Juan Luis Cipriani invited Lima's faithful to take the rosary and the Carmelite scapular to all homes in the context of the city's Great Mission.
Cardinal Cipriani reminded the faithful that "we have all come to this shrine to renew our dedication to the Virgin. We want to say to our Mother: Do not leave us, we need your fortitude, affection, purity, guidance and consolation."
"In this appointment we have every year in the shrine, on the solemnity of Our Lady of Mount Carmel, we come to fulfill our promises. Here I am, Mother! I give you my life, my marriage, my priesthood, my youth. I give them to you with all the pain, anticipation and hope. I trust in you," continued the 64-year-old cardinal.
"People must be taught to pray the rosary," he said. "It must be given to them and prayed in families, in streets, in schools, in hospitals and in churches. Mary wants this. Explain to people what the promise to Mary consists of; put the scapular on them, take it to all homes."
"Lima's Great Mission is in Mary's hands; our conversion is in Mary's hands; peace in the world is in her hands; the unity of the family, the protection of life, young people are in Mary's hands," Cardinal Cipriani said. "Therefore, we must come with those two great Marian instruments: the rosary and the scapular, you will see how people will change."
Cardinal Cipriani also encouraged the faithful to approach Mary, Our Lady of Mount Carmel, with confidence and to undertake with her the Way of the Cross: "Do not forget that Mary's great secret was to be beside the Lord on the Cross. Do not be afraid when you think you cannot; love the Cross."
Cardinal Cipriani prayed to Our Lady of Mount Carmel for the world's priests. "Mother of priests, take care of them and make them saints. May abundant vocations come, they are needed, to be able to take Jesus to all hearts."
What Cardinal Cipriani said is so beautiful.
By the way, a word about scapulars. I want to reassure people that they are not at all like "magic charms" or "idolatry." Here is what they are. Scapulars are two pieces of tiny squares of cloth connected by two cords, so that one cloth is worn like a necklace in front and one in the back. What they can be best thought of is "miniature devotional clothes" because that is what they are derived from. Scapulars are miniatures in necklace form of an actual full length and size outfit worn by the faithful. And so it is like wearing a miniature symbolic form of a wearing a uniform of belonging to a devotional order.
That is why they "work" in the facilitation of grace from God through the promise of Mary. Just as when a young man or woman joins the military and puts on the uniform, or a religious joins an order and puts on its habit, the wearing of the scapular is the putting on the body of a symbolic form of the order of devotion through which one is pledging fidelity and prayerful obedience to God. Mary is like the secular Captain, or the religious Abbess; she points the way and delivers the promise, but all grace comes from God and all worship goes to him. I hope this explanation and analogy helps, and I encourage a sincere return to the wearing of one of the Church approved scapulars, as it is efficacious and was until recently (these modern secular times) very common. (I wore one as a child).
Pope Sends Blessing to New Church in Russia
Kazan's Catholics to Have Place for Worship
KAZAN, Russia, AUG. 28, 2008 (Zenit.org).- Cardinal Angelo Sodano is bearing the blessing of Benedict XVI to a new church constructed in Kazan, where authorities of the Muslim-majority city have made the worship site possible.
Kazan, the capital city of the Republic of Tatarstan, will be home for the Church of the Exaltation of the Cross.
Cardinal Sodano stressed the importance of this new church, both for the city's small Catholic community as well as for interreligious dialogue. The 300 or so Catholics in Kazan had been celebrating Mass in a cemetery chapel.
Kazan is also an important site for the Orthodox, as it was the site of a 1579 apparition of the Virgin. The apparition is connected to the icon of the "Mother of God" of Kazan, which disappeared during the Russian Revolution. Venerated in its place in the Orthodox cathedral is a 17th-century reproduction of the icon, which belonged to the Holy See, and which Pope John Paul II gave to the Russian Orthodox Church in 2004. In a solemn ceremony in 2005, Patriarch Alexy II brought the icon to the city.
On Wednesday, the cardinal visited the Orthodox Shrine of Our Lady of Kazan. Afterward he visited the Orthodox monastery of the Archangel Raphael. "We embraced in the name of Mary," he said. "The best ecumenism is in Mary's name, the spiritual ecumenism that unites us all."
Further, I am delighted to see the growing list of Bishops (and most especially the statement by Cardinal Egan of New York http://www.archny.org/news-events/news-press-releases/index.cfm?i=8803) who reinforce the statement of the USCCB, issue their own statements, are demonstrating pastoral responsibilities in guiding their flocks, and who are standing and bearing witness to the truth of the Catholic Church.
THIS is what is needed to provide the fullness of truth to the faithful and by influence of sanctity and good will, to society as a whole. I commend all of you and praise you for taking the lead. Bishops must spend less time on administrative and other secular distractions and be sure to be prompt in guiding their flocks through times of confusion and indeed, lead in their formation and strengthening of faith. Ultimately all will be strengthened and purified by your examples, you will see.
God bless, and I hope this is the beginning of more active witness, faith formation and defense of our doctrine and truth by the Bishops.
Everyone with an education pretty much understands that humans belong to the evolved animal kingdom. In other words, humans came about through evolution just as did the animals, and that human ancestors were indeed animals (mammals). A mammal is an animal that gives birth to live young who are dependent on the mother for milk. So humans in their present form came into being as they evolved from early mammalian animals that branched into primates (the apes, monkeys and humans). Thus humans lived, evolved and grew under "animal rules" of life for all of their existence until they became aware and developed the intellect and ability to manage life and create civilizations. That, however, is a "recent" development on the scale of how long proto-human life has existed. So humans were living like animals, since they were still of the animals, for millions of years, until a time that is hard to define but definitely within only tens of thousands of years ago.
So how did sexual desire and reproduction evolve and function in the animal kingdom? Basically only behavior that was "pro life" and biased toward successful bearing of young and raising of them in the environmental setting was allowed to exist. There is a great check and balance within how life in general operates. For example, if animals run out of food that they can forage for, they die. If a population of animals becomes so small that a mate cannot be found, then no young are born, and eventually the population dies out. This has happened millions of time through the history of life on earth. Different species of animals come into being, thrive for a while, evolve, and either have successful descendants or die out in entirety.
Sex is not done for pleasure among animals, and it is a highly regulated activity. "Sexual attraction" means that an animal receives a cue from an animal of its opposite sex that it is "in heat," called estrus, which means it is capable of bearing young at that time. The form of cues have evolved and they involve everything from scent to certain display behaviors. Thus even elaborate courtship rituals and displays are not intimate or sexual, but are part of the signaling of being prepared to be a mate with the result being successful birthing of young. Animals tend to focus their intimacy in other ways than estrus based sex (which may happen as rarely as once a year for a minute, depending on the breeding cycle of the animal... the pandas are an example of the rarity of a sexual encounter and its matter of fact nature). Instead of utilizing sex, for which they have no drive unless they are in estrus, animals share intimacy through other actions such as grooming, nurturing of the young, and play. Another example is the living of some species in extended clans, colonies and pods, where the collective communion of their group living is, in a sense, an intimacy of familial and species connection. So sexual intimacy is virtually unheard of in the animal kingdom.
Now here we can show the first example of what would happen if a "child pervert" mutation sprang up in a given animal. Suppose a defective gene caused an animal to suddenly "view" pups in a "sexually available" way. That individual and defective gene would die out and have no possibility of being passed on to a future generation. Why? Well, think it through, it is obvious. First, the defective animal would signal willingness to mate with the pup, but receive no corresponding signal in return. Second, the parent of the pup would chase off and kill the defective animal, not because of "morals," but because adults who hang around pups usually want to kill them as prey. Polar bears are an obvious example of where mothers must keep their cubs away from any and all adult male bears, since pups are just viewed as potential food. Third, let's imagine in order to help you think through the human example of the child pervert that the defective animal is able to "molest" the pup. Well, obviously since the pup is not sexually mature, no offspring result and the defective gene of child perversion dies along with the individual who has the gene whenever that animal reaches its demise. This is why there is no "child pervert" attraction in animals except in individuals that have become environmentally or genetically dysfunctional.
So any animal behavior that one may observe that is latched onto as "an example of sexual attraction to the young in the animal kingdom" is fallacious. Why? Again, think about it. As I explained, if there is a genetic defect in the wild, it does not get passed on because it cannot be passed on either physically or "culturally." It dies with the unsuccessful mating of the defective adult. Anything you see today is in the zoo. Now, the zoo is a totally artificial environment that does not recreate, no matter how expansive or cleverly designed, the conditions of the wild. Let's use the pandas as an example. In the wild pandas can go for a year without even seeing another panda. They may occasionally encounter the scent of another (and that is one of the ways they can determine the once a year sexual receptivity of a potential mate, by "smelling" that the female is receptive because she is in heat and can produce an egg for fertilization).
In a zoo, think about it. Even if the animals are in separate cages they hear and smell each other constantly. So false clues and "cues" of sexual receptivity (or not!) are constantly emitted and received. How do we know that pandas, in this example, maintain their ability to distinguish between the scent of a receptive female from one that is not when they are constantly exposed to the cumulative effect every day of the year? I'm not making a scientific statement, but I am teaching you how to think this through: what differs between the zoo conditions and the wild? So you can see examples either way, again, just using pandas as an example, even though this isn't what actually happens with them. Two pandas may, through smelling each other constantly AND through their scent accumulating year round in both of their quarters, may not be able to distinguish genuine estrus time or not. So if someone observed "inappropriate" sexual "attraction" it is almost certainly due to the confusion of cues and the constant unnatural close confinement. An adult animal rubbing against a pup in such a situation is not "reinforcement" that "loving children is natural" for the perverts who scan animals and look to justify themselves. Any sexual behavior that is not the norm is the result of unnatural breeding conditions with the reinforcement of false and inappropriate cues.
And that is what has happened to humans, which is why there is such a high rate of perversion and why it is so tolerated in this society. Humans have smeared themselves with constant sexual cuing. They have taken what evolved to be a wonderful gift of pleasure that is meant to bind the family unit of adults to be able to bear children on a monthly basis (and thus there is really no estrus period for humans, as they are always sexually available once they are adults in their reproductive development) and made it into a self created zoo where totally inappropriate cues for inappropriate sexual activity and attraction are not only shared but actually forced upon society as a whole. This is why a growing portion of humans have become child perverts and I cannot begin to tell you how dangerous this de-volution (yes, not evolution, but dissolving of evolution as in devolution) is to all of humanity. Humans have broken away from natural and balanced behavior and cues and instead have unleashed a totally mutated society that reinforces false and wrong cues.
Women especially must bear a lot of guilt. They should have known better when they themselves suffered from being raped, and the charges dismissed because the cops or the judge thought "you asked for it because you dressed provocatively." Yet you buy products, including media, that provide visual cues that children, even babies, are "available" sexually. I cannot express how disappointed I am with women. It's one thing to totally sexualize adult society, and that is bad enough because it breaks down the sense of a cyclical availability of sex and thus a mind set of self restraint in a male. But women have by allowing themselves to be sexualized have made it so that the average male is surrounded by sexual cues so that the "obtaining of sex" is constantly on the mind of many men. (And increasingly women as they become child molesters too). Animal pups and young do not give off sexual cues except when they become adults and are ready to mate. Humans never used to seek out imaginary sexual cues from infants and children until they became saturated in sex and vice cues and stimulation and the penalty for such behavior does not scare them into stopping. The animal equivalent is the mother polar bear who would rip the head off of a defective young male polar bear who sought out her cubs (for any reason). Defective sexual interest in human "pups" is often undetected, is constantly reinforced and pandered through media, porn and sexualized society, and the danger of child porn has been underestimated until very recently. I'm not saying to kill everyone who views child porn (though wearing my biologist hat I have to tell you that it would be the way nature would work if humans were still part of nature). But I am explaining to you that there is absolutely no biological, spiritual or moral justification for child perversion, porn and molestation. You can now see more clearly why that is as I have stepped you through "how life really works" and the example of the problem of promoting false cues in the compressed and unnatural society that much of the world has now become.
I hope you find this helpful and if so, I will write more on this topic. This example, I think, is a very important start, especially for you young people who are readers of this blog, to put together the pieces and perspective of how society has gotten into the very dangerous mess that it is in today.
Who were they? They were the poor man and woman's Borgia, providing access to poison, spells that supposedly manipulated people in secret and, most important for you to know, they were the abortionists. That is why the average man AND woman hated witches. They were the "go to person" for baby killing. This is the opposite of the "innocent herbalist who is gracing the poor with her curing and healing 'lore' and 'wisdom'" that power drunk (and often literally) New Agers like to paint them as being. These were not the gentle sweet women who "were there because there were no doctors" who dispensed herbal cough remedies to the poor little children. They were the go-to women for poison, "spells," and abortions.
That is why there was witch hysteria that resulted in many innocent women being persecuted and killed. It is because a genuine class of self proclaimed witches ruined it for everyone else. The idea that witches provided medical care that was not available is totally false. How do we know that? Look at Biblical times, specifically the time of Jesus, which was well over a thousand years before the times of the witch persecutions. St. Luke was a physician. Also, when Jesus healed the woman with the hemorrhage, it is documented that she had been to "many" doctors. So there were real doctors available to the average person, including the poor, even in the time of Jesus. No one would have had to recourse to so called witches and they would have been horrified at the thought.
Further, poor people had their own medical knowledge. This is one of the big contractions in logic in the "witch apologist" lobby. They pretend that the poor dumb people knew nothing about medicine, and had to turn to those wonderful wise crones for their herbal cures. Um, anyone who knows anything about sociology and history knows that each household was self sufficient in both human AND animal medicine. Um, duh, remember that people who lived off the land, as everyone did then, obviously also handled their own medical needs, except for those that were so severe that a doctor was required. And that was usually so that tools could be accessed (remember that even in this country, barbers practiced medicine!) But people who had to care for livestock and again, virtually everyone did until the past century, did their own VET work too! There were no vets, dummies. So the average poor household was full of their own herbal and procedural knowledge to tend for their animals and care for the people in all routine illnesses. So it is a total lie that "white witches" provided any sort of benevolent "lore" or "medical care." They were the go-to source for dark purposes that derived from needing to do something immoral (and hence local knowledge would not suffice), such as poisoning or casting spells, but most importantly, abortions. And the vast majority of men AND women wanted as many babies as possible. Abortion was abhorrent then, much more than now. So again, abortion was sought out for dark reasons, not because some poor oppressed lady was losing her figure or starving due to that bad husband knocking her up.
This is why I hate all the media who has presented witches in a sympathetic and totally false light, and the revisionist New Age propaganda that has even seeped into schools curriculum. People freaked out and killed accused witches because they hated and feared what real self proclaimed witches did do. It is far from a "women's right" issue because most women hated and feared aborting, spell casting and poisoning witches as much as anyone. This is why often false accusations started with women accusing witches of harming their children. Women knew what real "witches" were really up to. That is why I was totally horrified (and remain so) in the 1990's when a well known Jungian analyst proudly told me that she is a "reincarnated witch who was persecuted and killed." She was PROUD of being a witch (not falsely accused, but of being one, or so she thought, since she's a wicked delusional idiot who believes in manipulative reincarnation, which does NOT exist in any form). But my point is that this freak was proud of being a "witch" from medieval times because she believes her own shit (as I've described above) instead of the truth of self proclaimed witches being abortion, poison and spell purveyors. This is why many women were the first to accuse these horrors, since good decent women knew exactly what these witches were actually up to. Witches were Godless aborting harlots of Babylon who poisoned and manipulated their way into local power, and then they squealed when it caught up with them, and they aborted one too many babies. And as a result, many innocent women were swept away in the persecutions because of the shit that "genuine" witches spread around through their dark deeds. Far from "fighting evil" witches made money and power off of other people's misery and sin, leading them further down the road of poisons, spell casting and abortions.
Every day I face death; I swear it by the pride in you [brothers] that I have in Christ Jesus our Lord.
Here Paul is declaring his pride in both individually and in community with the faithful that he faces death every day for the sake of Jesus Christ. Paul means this both literally (the danger of martyrdom) and symbolically, for death no longer has fear for those who follow the one who conquered death, Jesus Christ.
We have no way of knowing if Paul was actually thinking of this passage in Psalms when he wrote the above passage in Corinthians, but here you see that King David had a very similar thought and feeling. The footnote points the reader to Psalm 44:23.
For you [God] we are slain all the day long, considered only as sheep to be slaughtered.
King David is here, as he always did, referring like Paul to both physical danger but also the symbolic role of the faithful as sheep to experience the slaughter for God at the ends of their lives, and also the day to day surrendering of their clinging to life. So while David wrote this psalm during a time of trouble, he did not mean that literally the faithful were being killed in battle or something all day. Like Paul or, rather, centuries before Paul, David articulated the embracing of constant exposure to the danger of death in the glory of trust in God.
So here, whether St. Paul was actually drawing upon his memory of this psalm in his writing or not, you can see the identical inspired mindset separated by centuries between David and Paul. This gives you a better understanding of the continuity of inspirational thought and the shared metaphor for both of these holy men's comprehension of the new definition of death for the faithful who trust in God, as David personally avows, and in Jesus Christ, as Paul avows and exhorts others.
If you read chapters 30, 31, 32 of Ezekiel you will see that the Lord God is telling his prophet Ezekiel how he is going to smite the Pharaoh, leader of the Egyptians. Ezekiel names the pharaoh, Hophra, and is also detailed in dating the month and day when he receives his prophecies. Additionally, the action is centered as the Babylonians (the Chaldeans) are besieging Jerusalem, so Biblical scholars are able to precisely date the prophecies as Ezekiel receives them from God. For example, the prophesy that opens Ezekiel 31 occurred "On the first day of the third month in the eleventh year," which was in modern calendar terms June 21, 587 BC.
Now, if you read a Bible with a lot of footnotes, such as my NAB Personal Study Edition, scholars explain the historical events in their context. The Pharaoh had come to help Jerusalem defend itself against the invading Chaldeans. The prophecies to Ezekiel from God expresses his wrath at Egypt for interfering (for their own purposes, since they were seeking to gain their own control) with the chastisement that the Babylonians were about to deliver to Israel, specifically Judah. Thus one learns in reading and comprehending this section of the Bible a specific example of how God allows his chosen people, who have continually sinned and defied God, to fall. God allows the Egyptians to be severely beaten in battle due to their interference in God's divine punishment of Judah.
Now, in case you think that is "mean" of God, think again, and observe how sometimes what is "best" for a country is not so easy to discern. Modern day Iraq is an example where it is difficult to say that invasions, alliances, insurgence and all the variations have been advantageous to the country of Iraq, or not. Likewise God knew that the Babylonians would not slaughter the Jews, but would carry them away to Babylon in slavery. The interference of Egypt, led by the Pharaoh, would not only be unacceptable because of their stepping into the middle of God's chastisement of Judah, but it also expanded the entire conflict and the resulting casualties. God always knows better, and when he speaks through a genuine prophet like Ezekiel, people better obey, even if they don't understand all the facts on the face of what they are hearing.
Now, here is the Wikipedia entry for this very pharaoh, called Hophra by Ezekiel.
So here is a very easy to understand example of three aspects of God's words and the genuine historical events recorded in the Bible:
1. Ezekiel documents both the siege of Judah by the Chaldeans, a historic event that is documented in historic records outside of the Bible AND a pharaoh by name, whose existence is also documented in his home land's records. Thus this is an easy to ponder example of the reality of the events in the Bible.
2. Ezekiel documents prophecy by God that clearly relates to the actual events of the day. These are not mystical prophecies of a long off future time. These are actually "hands off" warnings regarding Egypt's actual interference in the chastisement of Judah that the Lord God is permitting to happen. So you can ponder the prophecies and know exactly what they relate to and how they indeed did occur (notice the prophecy and then the date of death of the Pharaoh).
3. This is an example of how only God knows the larger plan for the greatest good, even if it does not seem that way on the surface. Here God allows Israel to fall, in order to be chastised but also to be taken into captivity, and not slaughtered. The prophets knew to trust in God and they are diligent in recording these prophecies and events so that witness remains for future generations.
Remember also that Jesus is descended from the House of David, through both his earthly father Joseph (whose lineage is recorded in Matthew 1) and through his mother Mary. Therefore one of those ancestors listed in the genealogy of Jesus through Joseph's side would have been among those carried away to Babylon, and likewise a biological ancestor through Mary's undocumented lineage would also have been in the Babylon captivity. You can now appreciate how God's plan is much larger than any human can comprehend. The "assistance" of the pharaoh could have resulted in a slaughter instead of a captivity, and the killing of one or both of the ancestors of Joseph and Mary. Think about it. That is why God's plans should not be meddled with, for he will not tolerate it and much collateral damage can be done through meddling. For example, one knows that God would not have allowed the ancestor of Mary to be killed, but one has no way of knowing if the ancestor of Joseph would have fallen if the Egyptians had been allowed to extend the siege and battle into greater numbers of those slaughtered. Mary and the virginal birth of the Messiah through her are Biblically promised and assured by God, and thus protected, even from whatever humans are doing, so that God's prophecies are always fulfilled. But St. Joseph, spouse of Mary, is implied (the lineage of David) but not promised specifically. Thus the perfect spouse's (I don't mean sin free, but the blessed spouse of Mary) very existence is obviously known and foreseen by God and part of his greater plan. But I explain this to you to show you that interferring in God's plan in theory could result in very unhappy outcomes, such as what if St. Joseph's ancestor had been killed and so this great, strong and gentle man had never been born? That is why a true prophet hears and obeys God in ALL things, even if they seem difficult to understand on their face.
I hope you find this useful! God understands, and this is why the Bible is such a gift of the generations, that people need to see "how things work" and "why" as best as they can, so that their faith is strengthened. That is why these "ancient" and "boring" events are recorded for posterity to learn and understand. So I thought that as part of my series in helping people to better understand both God and the fullness of the Bible, this is a great intersection of ability to see and understand specific events that are proven to have existed in both historic and Biblical records.
Wednesday, August 27, 2008
And yep, her own father raped her.
A MELBOURNE abortion specialist was one of several health professionals who did not report the rape of a severely intellectually disabled woman when the perpetrator was insisting on the termination of her pregnancy, a tribunal has heard.
Dr Patricia Moore, an expert called into review the case of a late-term abortion performed without legal consent, yesterday expressed shock that so many people who assessed the woman's pregnancy did not act on the fact she had been raped.
"There was obviously evidence of sexual abuse that was not investigated by many people before the final episode," she said. "I started to wonder if a special procedure had not been performed if any of the professionals would have addressed the issue of sexual assault."
It is alleged Dr Schulberg performed the termination at 25 weeks without gaining legal consent through the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal, a legal requirement for an adult who is intellectually disabled.
It is alleged he did not contact police about pregnancy when he should have known she was incapable of consenting to sexual intercourse.
The woman's father, who helped organise the abortion, was convicted of the rape this year and sentenced to a minimum of seven years' jail.
The board heard the woman's father met at least one other doctor and social workers to discuss the termination of her pregnancy before he met Dr Schulberg at his Croydon clinic.
None of the health professionals took any action to find out who had raped the woman, despite some of them acknowledging that she was unable to consent to sexual intercourse, the board heard.
Forest ranger shot dead
Ranchi, Aug. 25: Forest ranger Lalan Prasad Gupta (50), posted at the Palamau Tiger Reserve in Betla, was shot dead by unknown assailants, suspected to be road robbers, at 4pm yesterday at Kadwan village under Bishrampur police station in Palamau district.
His body was brought to his Kadru Road residence at 9pm today.
Forest department officials today mourned the death of Gupta who they fondly recalled “looked more like Veerappan, towering at over six feet and sporting a long moustache, but a perfect gentleman at heart and an honest and upright” official.
Palamau superintendent of police Deepak Verma revealed that on Sunday, Gupta had left his official residence at Betla where he was posted, along with four forest staff members, to perform puja at a temple located at Bishrampur, some 50km away. While returning from Bishrampur, his vehicle broke down at Kadwan village.
The forest staff got off from the vehicle and started pushing it with Gupta at the wheel. Suddenly, a group of dacoits surrounded the vehicle and demanded money from the forest ranger. Though Gupta parted with all his valuables, including cash estimated to be around Rs 7,000, the criminals demanded more money.
When Gupta expressed helplessness and the robbers failed to extract any more cash, they shot Gupta from a close range killing him on the spot.
The others were allowed to go off without being hurt.
Gupta’s colleagues told The Telegraph that the forest official had turned religious ever since one of Gupta’s sons had died due to unknown reasons some years ago.
They recalled that Gupta, despite his personal tragedies, excelled in astrology and was an excellent palmist. Hailing from Sasaram in Bihar, Gupta had joined the forest department as a ranger in 1986-87.
Chief conservator forests (wildlife) Satish Kumar Sharma described Sharma as an able and honest forest official who discharged his duties with diligence.
Gupta had told The Telegraph last month that he had ordered a complete ban on tourists coming to Betla national park for two-and-a-half months to ensure that the inmates of the park — including tigers, elephants, bears, Indian porcupines, wolves, wild boars, wild dogs, birds — get some time and space to mate in peace without being disturbed.
He had claimed that this was the only means of ensuring a spurt in wildlife population.
Gupta was also actively engaged in educating villagers located within the immediate vicinity of the Betla reserve about the need to conserve forests and wildlife.
Let us assume that he lives. Look at that picture and tell me, who among you would be eager to grab a saw and decide that one head should remain and the other must be removed? No one in their right mind would think that. Yet suppose that one of the heads dies. Doesn't it now become much easier to discern, because now it is a medical procedure? The medical procedure would be justified as removing an organ that is endangering survival of the patient. That happens thousands of times a day in the world, where a dangerous organ is removed from a patient if it threats the life or health of the patient.
So would you ever have a law on the books allowing and even requiring beheading? Of course not. That is the point of my first question. No one would look at the living being, this sweet baby's both heads being the example, and point to one and say, "Cut if off." But if one of the heads becomes dysfunctional, or could cause the death of the child, then one has to rely on standard medical authorized procedures which is removal of the organ that is diseased and threatening the life of the patient.
This is why I have never had a problem with abortion being a legal medical procedure, but am totally pro life and anti-abortion. There are situations that while it is morally weak, it is medically justified, but if people were honest, they'd know that those are very, very rare. It is a difference between having "beheading" be an admired and sought out surgery, especially for infants like this Bangladesh baby, or with fused twins, etc, which of course is insane, versus having a standard medical procedure to perform if one has no other choices to save the literal life of the patient. Some women choose to risk death rather than remove even a life threatening pre born infant. They are saintly of the type we call everyday saints. Other women and their families would chose to live, especially if they are a mom to other children, and could morally opt for the abortion if their lives were in the balance. THIS is why I thought that abortion needs to be taught to doctors as an emergency medical procedure, but not as a "beheading" option.
Imagine my outrage that my support for abortion being a legally taught medical procedure for emergency situations where sainthood is not a wise option, and where it is understandable, to instead resulting in millions of women saying "their health is threatened by this pregnancy because they are bummed out and don't want a child, and don't want anyone else to have it via adoption because we're too self absorbed to 'sacrifice' the time out of our busy sexual schedules in order to let the baby be born to term."
So I hope the example of the little sweet baby in Bangladesh with the two heads and very uncertain future helps you, once again, to discern how someone can acknowledge that abortion is a medical procedure (like removal of an organ that no longer functions or threatens the life of the mother) but not an "option" (like beheading).
Who out there really believes that this would ever take place? Several people die and go to heaven, some of them have had or enabled abortions and some did not have abortions. Who here can visualize God taking the abortion experienced persons, patting them on the head, putting halos on them, and saying, "I'm so glad you really figured out that I am really pro abortion!" and then sends them directly to heaven. Then, God turns to those who did not have abortions and says, "I must chide you for making people who had abortions feel bad because you didn't have abortions yourself and you didn't support abortions in general, and you failed to correct the stupid Catholic Church, so I'm going to send you to purgatory for a while so you can repent for not realizing that I'm really pro abortion!"
OK. Who out there would honestly say that you think the above might ever actually really happen? *sound of crickets*
If you cannot even have a small percentage of certainty that the above could conceivably (no pun intended) take place, how can you dare to both believe in God and risk the highly likely opposite scenario? I mean, what kind of logic leads you to argue for a position that if you really wrote down its implications in hard letters as I have here, you have to admit that the likelihood of that scenario is less than nill?
Who here really thinks that God will praise them for "correcting" the "bad" Catholic Church, and going out there and with gusto having some abortions? And that God will chastise as "unsympathetic" those who did not have abortions, who had children instead, or who paid for orphans to be adopted into families? Who really thinks the above exercise scenario would ever take place? Face it, even an atheist would not believe the above scenario, because the atheist has to retreat into the "belief" that there is no God to question humans' actions and decisions at all.
You'll find this is a very useful exercise.
And so I was tremendously moved to read this article about a motorcycle accident, and the death of a lady who was a rescuer in New York City, a recoverer of bodies, after 9/11/2001. But it was not just that service that impressed me, but reading the totality of the life she led, well, she just sounded like a fine lady. My condolences to her friends, family and fellow service people.
Reservist, back from a mission, dies in motorcycle crash
A nurse and a sergeant in the Air Force Reserve, Nancy Winter won a commendation for her work helping to recover bodies after Sept. 11 at the World Trade Center.
She had transferred to the Wyoming unit last year to help an aunt with medical problems, her father said.
Last week, she returned with others in the 153rd MDG from a humanitarian mission in Guatemala, Forster said.
Tuesday, August 26, 2008
So those of you who might be reading my suggestion and not have a Catholic footnoted Bible at your finger tips, here is a sample of how it looks and reads, from my NAB Personal Study Edition.
The Promise of the Spirit. 1. (a) In the first book, Theophilus, I dealt with all that Jesus did and taught 2. (b) until the day he was taken up, after giving instructions through the holy Spirit to the apostles whom he had chosen. 3. (c) He presented himself alive to them by many proofs after he had suffered, appearing to them during forty days and speaking about the kingdom of God. 4. (d) While meeting with them, he enjoined them not to depart from Jerusalem, but to wait for "the promise of the Father about which you have heard me speak; 5. (e) for John baptized with water, but in a few days you will be baptized with the holy Spirit."
So you see there are five footnotes, one for each sentence, actually, (a), (b), (c), (d) and (e). So for each line you look at the bottom of the page (I need eyeglasses and my magnifying glass, since footnotes are printed frustratingly small!) Here is what you would find for each footnote.
(a) Lk 1, 1-4
(b) Mt 28, 19-20; Lk 24:44-49; Jn 20, 22; 1 Tim 3,16
(c) 1 Tim 10, 41; 13, 31
(d) Jn 14, 16.17.26
(e) Jn 11, 16; Mt 3, 11; Mk 1,8; Lk 3,16; Jn 1,26; Eph 1,13.
Thus you would read Acts 1:1 and then look up and read Luke 1:1-4.
Then you read Acts 1:2 and look up and read Matthew 28:19-20, Luke 24:44-49, John 20:22 and 1 Timothy 3:16.
Then you read Acts 1:3 and look up and read 1 Timothy 10:41 and 1 Timothy 13:31, and so on.
Trust me, it is worth looking up each and every one. It brings depth, multi-dimension witness to the faith, and even when repetitive it is a reminder that multiple people said and experienced the same things and drew the same conclusions. It really gets marvelous when the footnotes reference both Old Testament sources and derivations and the New, and that is when you really get a sense of working through the Bible in kind of a knitting way. Try it and you'll see. There's nothing like it and like I said, I'm amazed when people don't have these centuries of Catholic biblical scholarship available to them via footnotes in their Bibles!
I hope you find this helpful.
Since this is the year of St. Paul I suggest that instead of starting in the beginning of the Bible that you start with the Epistles of St. Paul. If you feel it would give you more continuity and context, you could start one book earlier which is The Acts of the Apostles, written by St. Luke with much information about St. Paul.
Now, the reason I am suggesting this is not because we are trying to focus on "honoring Paul" but rather, I'm going to let Paul be your "teacher" before you read the books of the Bible in sequence from Old Testament to the New. (Also in this year of St. Paul you may all want to be on the same page for Bible study and other activities, so this is another reason it would be good to couple a desire to read the entire Bible with starting with the books that are by St. Paul). How can you do that? By looking up and reading each footnoted Biblical reference as you read Acts and the letters of St. Paul. Yesterday I blogged an example of how to do that, where I cited a passage in 1 Corinthians and then, following the footnote, looked up and cited the passage in Psalms to which St. Paul can be inferred to be referencing.
By doing this exercise you will be following the footsteps of both St. Paul, where the footnotes indicate he is quoting, but also the centuries of Catholic biblical scholars, who use footnoting to indicate where ideas were previously raised, and also where prophecy is fulfilled. Thus you will be reading in sequence through the Bible but on each page of Bible text you will do on an average of something like ten or more look ups throughout the Bible.
For example, I have open over to my side on my table the New American Bible "The Catholic Bible: Personal Study Edition." So if you have that edition you can follow along with me. On page 185 of the new Testament is the first page of The Acts of the Apostles. On that page after the informative scholar introduction there is only 6 lines of scripture (Acts 1:1-6) yet there are five footnotes (a-e) citing fourteen (!) relevant references of Biblical passages. In this example they are all New Testament references. Sometimes they are informational, or parallel doctrine or events, so they are there for a variety of reasons. But like a net it weaves a three dimensional understanding of the Bible, and specifically the passages that you are reading, if you follow each and every one of those footnotes. You cannot look up and read each passage cited via footnote without understanding and perceiving the Bible as you never have before, and thus have a more accurate view, of placing you more fully within the reality of the human and divine life that real people doing real things in communion with a real faith community and their real One God experience.
So if you turn the page, to page 186, where there is a full page of Acts 1:7-26 through Acts 2:1, there are thirteen footnotes for that page, and since some footnotes have multiple citations, I see at a glance at least twenty two passages cited, from both Old Testament (Isaiah, Psalms, Kings, Proverbs, Deuteronomy, Leviticus) and New Testament (the Gospels, Ephesians, Revelation). By looking up each and every one of those passages you will gain an enormous sense of being "within" the events and the perspective of the Biblical authors and indeed, within God's greater plan, as you see how every verse is dense with both contemporary corroborative reference and drawing upon the roots of the faith in the Old Testament.
When you work your way through several books of the Bible in this fashion, even if you do not do the footnote reading for the entire Bible, when you read each chapter, especially now going back to the beginning to read from Genesis onward, you will recognize passages that you referenced but more important, you will feel in a way you never did the three dimensional continuity and deep significance of everything in the Bible within the fullness of its entire context. That is how the Bible is meant to be read and understood, and it is how it traditionally has been read and understood. It is only secular "self help," "self enabling," "question and 'right' answer look up" mentality of modern times that have ruined this experience.
Trust me, if you read the Bible the way I suggest here, you will marvel at the results. Try it! I hope you find this helpful and God bless.
A challenge for Pope Benedict: Leading more people to read the BibleVATICAN CITY (CNS) -- When Pope Benedict XVI chose the Bible as the topic for this fall's Synod of Bishops, he turned the church's attention to an area he has long considered crucial and in need of revitalization. The pope's concern touches several levels. For one thing, despite an upsurge in biblical interest after the Second Vatican Council, only a minority of Catholics read the Bible regularly. The pope views the lack of scriptural formation as part of a wider crisis of catechetics in the church. At a more academic level, the pope sees a danger in modern biblical interpretation that he believes diminishes the meaning of Scripture and erodes the bond between Bible and church. In particular, he has warned that various modern-day methods of interpreting the Bible are too limiting; for instance, some scholars read Scripture as if they are seeking to break a code and pluck out answers one by one. Instead, Pope Benedict believes the Bible must be seen as a whole and as the word of God, in which everything relates to everything else and offers the possibility of a spiritual journey, rather than being seen as a textbook on divine matters. So in convoking some 250 bishops for the Oct. 5-26 synod, the pope did not intend to host a forum for scriptural analysis. His primary interest is pastoral, and a main challenge is to lead more Catholics to the Bible.
- - -
And on this topic, Pope Benedict made a prompt appointment of a vacancy that was opened due to a sad passing. Notice the bible scholar appointed to this position is an Archbishop from Congo.
Pope names Congolese bishop as special secretary of synod on Bible
By John Thavis Catholic News Service
VATICAN CITY (CNS) -- Pope Benedict XVI named Archbishop Laurent Monsengwo Pasinya of Kinshasa, Congo, as the special secretary of the October Synod of Bishops on the Bible.Archbishop Monsengwo, a longtime biblicist and one of Africa's most experienced churchmen, will assist in the preparation of two reports during the synod and the preparation of its final recommendations.
He replaces Bishop Wilhelm Egger of Bolzano-Bressanone, Italy, who died of a heart attack in mid-August. Bishop Egger was named special secretary in January and had been working over the summer to prepare for the Oct. 5-26 assembly.Archbishop Nikola Eterovic, secretary-general of the Synod of Bishops, told Vatican Radio Aug. 23 that the pope's appointment of Archbishop Monsengwo was a sign of the importance of Africa for the church.
Archbishop Monsengwo, 68, has participated in several synods in recent decades and, as a member of the Synod of Bishops' 15-man council, had been involved closely in the planning for the synod on the Bible.Archbishop Monsengwo studied in the 1960s at Rome's Pontifical Biblical Institute, earning a doctorate in biblical sciences. He was made a bishop in 1980, and was named to head the Archdiocese of Kinshasa in late 2007.
He is president of the Congolese bishops' conference and former president of the Symposium of Episcopal Conferences of Africa and Madagascar.Archbishop Eterovic said that the planning for the October synod was in its final phase, and that a list of papal appointees to the synod would be announced soon. Some 250 bishops and some priests are expected to participate in the synod; they will include representatives chosen by bishops' conferences, synods of Eastern churches and confederations of religious orders.
All GREAT news!! The Holy Father knows what he is doing!! Trust in God, the Pope, and read your Bibles!!
For those of you who might be interested in tackling the entire Bible all over again (or reading it cover to cover for the first time) I have a suggestion, consistent with what I have been teaching and tudoring here. I'll put that suggestion in the blog's next entry!
Thus, there is a difference between voting for a candidate who is qualified, but has a great flaw in the viewpoint of Catholics, such as one who favors abortion, and a candidate who may or may not be qualified and worse, argues with the voter about whether their understanding of God is correct. I feel that we have examples of the latter in presidential candidate Obama and Speaker Pelosi. Pelosi's bumbling butchering of characterizing Catholic doctrine about abortion is outrageous, and her claims to be an expert when she's so pig ignorant is astonishing to say the least.
(By the way, Nancy, a "doctor" of the Church is not the author of Church doctrine. "Doctor" is a title given to a certain class of saints who acted in heroic defense of the Church during times of trial, through their intellect, example and remedies. Church "doctors" are individual saints who so distinguished themselves in an area of devotion, defense or church support that they merit a title that is much like "honorary doctorates" given out by universities today. Just because "doctor" and "doctrine" both start with "d-o-c" does not mean that one "invents" the other, duh.)
So I have voted for qualified candidates who, unfortunately, supported abortion. But I have never voted for one who has the nerve to be a self proclaimed inflated spokesperson on behalf of "what God really meant," and who then spews contrary to the institutional faith of two thousand and more years.
I need to also point out something so screamingly obvious I cannot believe that anyone is fooled by it. About the Church stance toward abortions. How can people like Pelosi with any intellectual honesty try to "scan" and cherry pick from Church teaching looking for a statement about "when life starts" when access to abortion was nill until recently? Don't get me wrong, some women have induced abortions throughout history (often through witchcraft, which is one reason witches were so hated). But very few women really sought abortion, rather, they risked their lives repeatedly having children, as children were their grace, their livelihood and support. No one except the most desperate sought abortions (in times of famine and so forth miscarriages negated the economic "justification" for abortion). But even then, obviously in times of famine, women wanted more children, more hands to help in the fields and household, not less. It was a totally different mindset than today. No one had to "put in the Bible" that abortion is wrong, because there was no mindset toward doing such an unthinkable thing. Also, remember that men and women prayed most earnestly for a child from God. When the woman became pregnant, she or her husband didn't wait to thank God until the baby popped out because "it's not a human life until x months in gestation." You know, the simple people among humans were always the wisest. I mean, duh, when they prayed to God for a child, as soon as the womb quickened and they knew of the pregnancy, they knew they had received a child from God, not a temporary lump of clay that gets a soul and a guardian angel on some man made date. God sends a baby with a guardian angel when the womb quickens with the embryo. I mean, duh, do you think God sends a "hold this place" card: "gift card must be redeemed in three months, six months, nine months?"
Stupid people need to read the Bible, and they should. But they should not then open their mouths and call themselves "experts" for their own self serving purpose, and especially when they demonstrate such ignorance of even basic information (see above about Pelosi's "Doctor Augustine.") Oh my God, what a mess this society has become, and our leaders are crap.