In the beginning was the Word. And the Word does not die out. The Lord gives bread to us from his own table, the most pure Holy Eucharist, body of Our Savior Jesus Christ. The people gather together to celebrate the Sacrifice, and witness the Consecration. The Holy Presence comforts the lone adorer in the chapel, in silence. Those who believe may count themselves blessed, for the Savior is with them. Though nations are in turmoil, in the Holy Presence we have peace and grace from God. We kneel before the Holy Presence and give thanks. Amen.
***
Written by me July 27, 2008, my own words with a little help from King David. This prayer is intended for those who are pondering the mystery of the Holy Eucharist. It's a type of creed prayer rather than a petitioner prayer. It is meant for strength of faith and serenity. As always I especially have the young people in mind who are so very devoted to the Holy Eucharist and its adoration.
Saturday, July 26, 2008
Question for engineers, landscapers, whoever
I'm reading about all the drownings around the NYC coastline. I'm one of those who can't swim in the ocean because I can't swim well enough to handle waves or even mild current. So I can relate to how people get pulled out and go under. So I just had a thought, which may be totally impractical technically, but since it's on my mind, here it is. Is there any way that technically a net could be installed for a section of beach at about the five foot depth? In this section people, especially kids, could still enjoy the surf and ocean water, but not be in danger of being swept out because they'd reach the net first. So a small area of the ocean front could be set aside for weak swimmers and kids where this net would run along to catch anyone being swept with their feet out under them, knocked over by surf but not then pulled out, or in any current they can't handle that might pull them out, since the water would flow through the net but not the person. This might not be practical (I dunno) as far as installing it, but why not? If one can drive pilings for docks into sand, then why not a piling every ten yard with net across it? I get that with the tide it has to be strong netting but that's not a new invention. And this is probably not practical at packed urban beaches, but then again, why not if the viewpoint is that this is kind of a virtual contained spot for weak swimmers and kids? Hmm. I just thought I'd put that idea out there. I'm only the idea lady, not the nut and bolt person. And before insurance companies start to hate on me, I read one of the moms of a drowned person questioning the training and number of lifeguards. So I think the likelihood of someone getting stuck in one of the nets is small (especially as a lifeguard would be dedicated to that section) and actually that would help insurance issues because weak swimmers would be advised to stick to that area. It would be guaranteed and checked daily that there are no drop offs and so forth, so it's extra safe. I'd want any little kid of mine to be in that area. Hmm. So that's the idea. Resorts may want to think about it; parents might find that a real attraction. Maybe it's already done, or the surge is not the problem it is on Coney Island and so forth. Just a thought.
Spiritual direction: God and his given religions
Understanding God and his religions
One of humanity’s greatest misunderstanding about belief in the one God and obeying the religion he has founded is that people think religion is an individual event and responsibility. It is not; God’s religion is a community event. This has always been a weakness in logic in humans, to think it is “up to each person,” but it has become distorted beyond recognition in modern times. Before modern times, strong love and allegiance toward one’s family, community, tribe, clan or other social organization ensured the glue that kept the seeking of God and obedience to his religious tenets in a community setting. The first breaking away of realization that God expects and delivers “salvation” (to use an evangelical term) on a community basis came with the Reformation. Not only did the Reformation give birth to the notion that one can break away from the Church institution founded by Jesus Christ and in the true Apostolic lineage, but hundreds of years later the notion arose that people can construct their own denominations. Communal worship became incorrectly transformed into “virtual communities” as people collect together according to what pastor or church “they select.” So this is one example of the splintering of true human communities of worship into artificial cohesions of people who “shop at the same faith store.” I don’t mean this to disparage individual faith or goodness of intention. But clarity of vision is sometimes unpleasant feeling, and so you have to be a bit uncomfortable in order to see the truth. Just to point out a further extension of the Reformation children’s breakdown of natural collective worshiping communities and their replacement with “choice” based virtual communities, within this devolution was the notion that the individual is responsible for finding “the right church” and that salvation is “individual based.” This is the exact opposite of God’s intention regarding how he gave religion to humans and how they should view it. Religion is not “one person’s search for making themselves “OK” with God, and doing so with like minded individuals who find each other shopping at the same faith store.” And so you find post Reformation children sneering at traditional Catholics who “let the Church ‘tell them what to do’ when it ought to be ‘between the individual and God.’” Um, no, if you read the Bible you see that the religion that God gave the children of Abraham is never “just between the individual and his or her conscience and God.” There is absolutely no Biblical justification for the “individual searching for the ‘right’ religion and ‘truth’” delusion that many live under today.
In the Jewish faith you see the same problem, only this time instead of the Reformation it was the destruction of the Temple, the Diaspora and secular pressures that resulted of division of worship from one community to roughly three: Reform, Conservative and Orthodox. Again, because of social pressures and the belief that “it’s up to the individual” the community worship disintegrated. Some reform rabbis have gone so far as to even meddle in Catholic dogma by “hosting” profane “ordinations” outside of the Church. I mention this because I guess Reform rabbis don’t find enough to do to worship God in their own faith that they have to muck about in someone else’s. This is why I’ve always had an affinity for the Orthodox. Even if I disagree with their politics they have never once forgotten that faith as mandated by God is a community event that is focused on God and his expectations, not “what each individual feels ‘called’ to do.” So you see in the unrecognizable extremes of the three broad parts of Jewish faith that one end clings correctly to understanding that communal values as dictated by God comes first, while the opposite end is “do your own thing.” Again, I do not question individuals’ theoretical love of God. But as in any love relationship, its trueness and purity is ascertained by asking the question, “Do you put the beloved first in importance?” Individuals and congregations that do not put God first, putting him behind social pressures and individual “conscience” cannot really say that they love God as much as the person who puts their worship of God and obedience to his will, even when they don’t understand it, first and foremost.
Islam too had to deal with a fragmentation crisis, but this is much different from the rejection of the community embodiment of faith as God has dictated. Islam’s fragmentation did not come from the secular influences of “do your own thing within your ‘conscience,’” but rather from legitimate cultural confusion regarding the successors to the Prophet (PBUH). Unlike the post Reformation Christians and the liberal wing of the Jewish faith, it never has and it never will occur to Muslims to start thinking of their faith as “individual and conscience based” and to abandon the community embodiment. Instead Islam split into legitimate community bodies based on tribal, familial and ancestral interpretation of how to be part of the lineage of the Prophet’s successors. Islam maintains the community worship cohesiveness that God has demanded of all the faiths, but it does so along several separate lineages. These were not resulting from “secular” pressures or the “rational rise of the individual,” but from understandable difference in interpretation of how to maintain consistent lineage from the familial and spiritual descendents of the Prophet and his companions. So you would never see a mosque being built that is a “non denominational mosque” or a “mega-mosque” or a “liberal mosque,” in either branch of Islam. This is not because Islam is “stuck in the past and won’t modernize” but because they are correctly faithful to the understanding that worship of God must be communal in the tradition sense of community, not artificial or “virtual” communities based on “shopping preference.”
And so that brings us to “cafeteria Catholics.” We have the traditional and true Catholics and we have a huge dose of “cafeteria” or “liberal” “Catholics.” Now, I want to exclude from this discussion Catholics who are earnest with the Church but struggle in good faith within themselves regarding a teaching such as birth control. I am not speaking about them at all in this explanation and critique. Rather, I am speaking about those who want to break apart the faith from within for exactly the same reasons as the Reformation children did, although they may deny it. Gosh, I wish that nuns and others who feel that way would just leave. I really do. Their continued presence within the Church is just not worth their “good deeds” and “devotion.” The moment that they took off their habits for their own “comfort,” they put God aside in second place. We don’t need them and I wish they would go to the nearest “non denominational” church and become their cross to bear! Boy, would the non-denominationals earn brownie points with God if they took liberal “Catholics,” especially those from the religious orders off us Catholics’ hands. So the busy bee nuns who ruin the faith and still claim they “want to be priests,” do God a big fat favor and leave the Church and go worship him with a non-denominational. I mean, they are all “equal” and “fair,” right? I am not joking. Do us all a favor and leave. You ruin the community of the Church that is already challenged by societal and geographic pressures. But be smart and do not keep adding that sin of pride and sabotage to your hands: do the right thing and LEAVE.
The Catholic Church with the traditionalists in her body, remain faithful to the concept of God’s worship as community, even as it struggles with secular pressures and deliberate attack by those who feel they represent either “fairness” or the Enemy (and they are hard to tell apart since the outcome of their deeds is so similar). But the traditionalists demonstrate over and over that the Catholic Church maintains its communal aspirations of faith just as God has demanded, and as articulated by Jesus Christ. For example, Churches do close down in urban areas, and it grieves me to see this even more than it grieves all of you, trust me. Remember, those are buildings that held the sacred Presence of Jesus Christ, they weren’t just Christian after school activity buildings with a basketball hoop. Whenever a Catholic Church closes, you know what it feels like to me? That a cemetery full of loved ones is bulldozer over to “make way for ‘progress.’” But my consolation is that the community of Catholics has moved, whether it be to the suburbs, or to the Southern USA, for example, and a new Church will arise there. But do not forget that every Church closing to me is the shuttering of the place that once held the sacred Presence of Jesus. However, I will not accept it staying open if the price is that people who undermine the faith from within continue to use it. I don’t want guitar playing “womyn priests” dancing around their “sacred cauldron” because “hey, you need us because you are low on vocations.” No, I don’t need you. Shut down the Church and go to your local non-denomination and lord it over them. Don't tell me "it's your church too." It's not. If you reject it and sabotage it from within, obviously it's not "your" church. So find one that is and beat it, and do everyone else a genuine favor.
So whenever a Catholic Church closes down, as painful as it is, it is still a legitimate consequence of reality of community faith. If there is not enough of the traditional community left in the area, then the Church must close down and resources be pooled at the next highest and dispersed level of community worship. And if the traditional faithful must leave, due to migration, job pressures and societal relocation, then they will open a new Church within their community. And wherever they are they can look to Rome, to the heir of St. Peter, for the true global Church community. You see examples of this in Muslim countries, where they have come to recognize that with immigrant workers comes a mobile, dislocated Catholic, and other Christians, community that must have places to worship. It is the Islamic faithfulness to God in their understanding that worship of God is communal that has helped them to be generous to recognize that Christians need facilities even in Muslim countries, for they cannot, as the Muslims themselves do not do, worship individually in back rooms of their apartments. So here you will see migrant workers, such as Pilipinoes and Indians, come together in formation of a local Christian community. These migrant workers are not “picking and choosing” to “select the place of worship” that “best suits their individual ‘needs’ and ‘conscience.’” They are creating new communities by virtue of their being Christian, and needing new churches to satisfy that need. They aren’t flipping through the yellow pages in order to go to the place that they are “most comfortable with” because it’s a “fair place” and “matches my needs.” They are pilgrims who bring the need for their church with them upon their backs. They are the ones who understand God’s gift to them of community based worship, not cafeteria or non-denominational personality based and demand free “individual choice.”
And now I must say something that I do not enjoy, but I do not want to be accused of neglecting the validity of the faith of others. I have always been fond of the Dali Lama as a person, and as a spiritual personage. But I cannot relate to a religious leader who left his one and only faith community behind. It’s not like Tibetan Buddhists are misnamed Global Buddhists. When Tibet was claimed by China, the body of the faithful who in my Abrahamic view of religion needed their leader to stay. It is not like during the capture of Israel by the Babylonians that the Jewish priests cut and run. The Jewish priests went along into captivity with their people. I mention this example because there you have one body, one community of faithful, with one leadership, exactly as the situation was in Tibet. It’s not like he moved “his flag from one command ship to the other.” Now, I read his books and I understand that he was a young man and pressured to flee. But once one is older, and one sees that one’s people are left behind, why does one not return to them, if one truly believes their faith and destiny? Celebrities and the secular politics latched onto him, and I mourned that, for that demarked the end of the legitimate community of worship. And of course, in the Catholic faith, the cardinals wear red for a reason.
I hope that you all, especially the young people, who, like Pope John Paul II, are always on my mind, find this useful, although perhaps a cross to bear in understanding. God never intended his word, his instructions and his institutions to be reduced to what one individual “evaluates” that he or she is “most comfortable with” or finds the “fairest.” To help, here is an analogy.
Suppose that God gave humans a set of blueprints for their individual homes that were absolutely fail proof. If one followed the instructions and built the three bedrooms, two bath all mod con home exactly according to instructions it would last a lifetime, be safe, affordable and easy to maintain, withstanding even harsh weather. So for several thousand years family after family built their houses and passed the blueprint from God on to their children.
Now, we have the “Do your own thing” generation that thinks it is demonstrated its wisdom by rejecting what the old folks say (and having a few puffs on weed while they are at it). They say, “Why should we believe that these blueprints are ‘the best?’” Should we not shop for “options?” So many of them do not use the blueprints at all. Others make “modifications” that “correct stupid mistakes.” For example, they take out the cellar because “Who needs a cellar?” And then they do not understand when the old folks tell them that in a tornado, to go into the storm shelter in the cellar. Huh? Others decide that “aliens” are “filled with wisdom” and are “channeling advanced and spiritual blueprints” and they either build houses based on that, or they endlessly doodle what they think they are hearing from “aliens,” or they live in traditional houses paid for by gulliable people who buy their books containing “alien blueprints.”
Eventually an entirely obsessive compulsive generation of home builders arises. They follow the blueprints given by God to their parents but with one exception. They spend a day building a wall, and the next day they knock down that wall. The day after that they raise the wall again, and then the day after that they knock that wall down again. And the next day they build a second wall, because it’s “the right time” to build that particular wall, and then the day after that they tear down that wall again.
That is what happens when a generation does not understand that true wisdom is accumulated and handed down, and that the body of information is not meant to be “reinvented” over and over again. That’s almost as stupid as if someone declared that it is passé to breathe oxygen, and from now on the truly enlightened will only breathe hydrogen. I mean, belief in breathing oxygen is so old fashioned and oppressive. Who is God or our ancestors to tell us to breathe oxygen? That is what it is like to deny fundamental truths and fundamental healthy community of worship as given to humans by God and God alone. These people will tell you that the “blueprint drawers” were “oppressed” and that is why they have “three bedrooms” because in the “patriarchal bourgeois society of the past the women were forced to be demeaned” and that this shows that God and the blueprints from him are “mistranslated” or the “rest of societal oppression.”
I may seem that I’ve strayed from the original point but I have not at all. There is an arrogant affectation that will result in the end of humanity that arises from the modern notion that “individuals decide what is best for them” and that only old pagan beliefs are good, while old truths that God has taught are “bad or at least questionable.” They ignore saints who were pagans, who were intellectuals, like St. Justin, who looked at pagan and Christian dogma side by side and chose Christianity, recognizing the truth of it. But today, many of the middle aged and older people grew up with a belief that “if it is old it is good, unless it is Christianity.” I’m hopeful and very prayerful that the younger people are beginning to see the error in logic of their parents. Why are “runes” so enlightening while the Bible is not? Who cares what the Pharaohs thought, because they are dead now aren’t they? I mean, if they were such geniuses and so holy and smart, where are they now? Hmm. Who is there instead? The children of the true Abrahamic faiths: Muslims and Christians. But your parents’ generation, dear children, because they wanted to be self proclaimed priests and priestesses, glommed onto anything old and rotten so that they could have libertine lifestyles and call themselves “special” and “enlightened.” And as a result, young people, they are teaching you out of textbooks of rotten skulls and cat box dung.
No one knows humans better than God, obviously, because he knows everything, he created humans, and he knows everything they do and what they will choose to do in the future. Yet God did two things because he loves humans. He gave them free will to make their own decisions, and he gave them the safest and most joyous blueprints possible, knowing what they need to live, thrive, and hopefully, choose to find Him and be saved. What have your parents given you? Have they passed on to you the blueprints that they received from God through their parents? Or have they passed onto you something else? Think about it.
God bless those who seek and find.
One of humanity’s greatest misunderstanding about belief in the one God and obeying the religion he has founded is that people think religion is an individual event and responsibility. It is not; God’s religion is a community event. This has always been a weakness in logic in humans, to think it is “up to each person,” but it has become distorted beyond recognition in modern times. Before modern times, strong love and allegiance toward one’s family, community, tribe, clan or other social organization ensured the glue that kept the seeking of God and obedience to his religious tenets in a community setting. The first breaking away of realization that God expects and delivers “salvation” (to use an evangelical term) on a community basis came with the Reformation. Not only did the Reformation give birth to the notion that one can break away from the Church institution founded by Jesus Christ and in the true Apostolic lineage, but hundreds of years later the notion arose that people can construct their own denominations. Communal worship became incorrectly transformed into “virtual communities” as people collect together according to what pastor or church “they select.” So this is one example of the splintering of true human communities of worship into artificial cohesions of people who “shop at the same faith store.” I don’t mean this to disparage individual faith or goodness of intention. But clarity of vision is sometimes unpleasant feeling, and so you have to be a bit uncomfortable in order to see the truth. Just to point out a further extension of the Reformation children’s breakdown of natural collective worshiping communities and their replacement with “choice” based virtual communities, within this devolution was the notion that the individual is responsible for finding “the right church” and that salvation is “individual based.” This is the exact opposite of God’s intention regarding how he gave religion to humans and how they should view it. Religion is not “one person’s search for making themselves “OK” with God, and doing so with like minded individuals who find each other shopping at the same faith store.” And so you find post Reformation children sneering at traditional Catholics who “let the Church ‘tell them what to do’ when it ought to be ‘between the individual and God.’” Um, no, if you read the Bible you see that the religion that God gave the children of Abraham is never “just between the individual and his or her conscience and God.” There is absolutely no Biblical justification for the “individual searching for the ‘right’ religion and ‘truth’” delusion that many live under today.
In the Jewish faith you see the same problem, only this time instead of the Reformation it was the destruction of the Temple, the Diaspora and secular pressures that resulted of division of worship from one community to roughly three: Reform, Conservative and Orthodox. Again, because of social pressures and the belief that “it’s up to the individual” the community worship disintegrated. Some reform rabbis have gone so far as to even meddle in Catholic dogma by “hosting” profane “ordinations” outside of the Church. I mention this because I guess Reform rabbis don’t find enough to do to worship God in their own faith that they have to muck about in someone else’s. This is why I’ve always had an affinity for the Orthodox. Even if I disagree with their politics they have never once forgotten that faith as mandated by God is a community event that is focused on God and his expectations, not “what each individual feels ‘called’ to do.” So you see in the unrecognizable extremes of the three broad parts of Jewish faith that one end clings correctly to understanding that communal values as dictated by God comes first, while the opposite end is “do your own thing.” Again, I do not question individuals’ theoretical love of God. But as in any love relationship, its trueness and purity is ascertained by asking the question, “Do you put the beloved first in importance?” Individuals and congregations that do not put God first, putting him behind social pressures and individual “conscience” cannot really say that they love God as much as the person who puts their worship of God and obedience to his will, even when they don’t understand it, first and foremost.
Islam too had to deal with a fragmentation crisis, but this is much different from the rejection of the community embodiment of faith as God has dictated. Islam’s fragmentation did not come from the secular influences of “do your own thing within your ‘conscience,’” but rather from legitimate cultural confusion regarding the successors to the Prophet (PBUH). Unlike the post Reformation Christians and the liberal wing of the Jewish faith, it never has and it never will occur to Muslims to start thinking of their faith as “individual and conscience based” and to abandon the community embodiment. Instead Islam split into legitimate community bodies based on tribal, familial and ancestral interpretation of how to be part of the lineage of the Prophet’s successors. Islam maintains the community worship cohesiveness that God has demanded of all the faiths, but it does so along several separate lineages. These were not resulting from “secular” pressures or the “rational rise of the individual,” but from understandable difference in interpretation of how to maintain consistent lineage from the familial and spiritual descendents of the Prophet and his companions. So you would never see a mosque being built that is a “non denominational mosque” or a “mega-mosque” or a “liberal mosque,” in either branch of Islam. This is not because Islam is “stuck in the past and won’t modernize” but because they are correctly faithful to the understanding that worship of God must be communal in the tradition sense of community, not artificial or “virtual” communities based on “shopping preference.”
And so that brings us to “cafeteria Catholics.” We have the traditional and true Catholics and we have a huge dose of “cafeteria” or “liberal” “Catholics.” Now, I want to exclude from this discussion Catholics who are earnest with the Church but struggle in good faith within themselves regarding a teaching such as birth control. I am not speaking about them at all in this explanation and critique. Rather, I am speaking about those who want to break apart the faith from within for exactly the same reasons as the Reformation children did, although they may deny it. Gosh, I wish that nuns and others who feel that way would just leave. I really do. Their continued presence within the Church is just not worth their “good deeds” and “devotion.” The moment that they took off their habits for their own “comfort,” they put God aside in second place. We don’t need them and I wish they would go to the nearest “non denominational” church and become their cross to bear! Boy, would the non-denominationals earn brownie points with God if they took liberal “Catholics,” especially those from the religious orders off us Catholics’ hands. So the busy bee nuns who ruin the faith and still claim they “want to be priests,” do God a big fat favor and leave the Church and go worship him with a non-denominational. I mean, they are all “equal” and “fair,” right? I am not joking. Do us all a favor and leave. You ruin the community of the Church that is already challenged by societal and geographic pressures. But be smart and do not keep adding that sin of pride and sabotage to your hands: do the right thing and LEAVE.
The Catholic Church with the traditionalists in her body, remain faithful to the concept of God’s worship as community, even as it struggles with secular pressures and deliberate attack by those who feel they represent either “fairness” or the Enemy (and they are hard to tell apart since the outcome of their deeds is so similar). But the traditionalists demonstrate over and over that the Catholic Church maintains its communal aspirations of faith just as God has demanded, and as articulated by Jesus Christ. For example, Churches do close down in urban areas, and it grieves me to see this even more than it grieves all of you, trust me. Remember, those are buildings that held the sacred Presence of Jesus Christ, they weren’t just Christian after school activity buildings with a basketball hoop. Whenever a Catholic Church closes, you know what it feels like to me? That a cemetery full of loved ones is bulldozer over to “make way for ‘progress.’” But my consolation is that the community of Catholics has moved, whether it be to the suburbs, or to the Southern USA, for example, and a new Church will arise there. But do not forget that every Church closing to me is the shuttering of the place that once held the sacred Presence of Jesus. However, I will not accept it staying open if the price is that people who undermine the faith from within continue to use it. I don’t want guitar playing “womyn priests” dancing around their “sacred cauldron” because “hey, you need us because you are low on vocations.” No, I don’t need you. Shut down the Church and go to your local non-denomination and lord it over them. Don't tell me "it's your church too." It's not. If you reject it and sabotage it from within, obviously it's not "your" church. So find one that is and beat it, and do everyone else a genuine favor.
So whenever a Catholic Church closes down, as painful as it is, it is still a legitimate consequence of reality of community faith. If there is not enough of the traditional community left in the area, then the Church must close down and resources be pooled at the next highest and dispersed level of community worship. And if the traditional faithful must leave, due to migration, job pressures and societal relocation, then they will open a new Church within their community. And wherever they are they can look to Rome, to the heir of St. Peter, for the true global Church community. You see examples of this in Muslim countries, where they have come to recognize that with immigrant workers comes a mobile, dislocated Catholic, and other Christians, community that must have places to worship. It is the Islamic faithfulness to God in their understanding that worship of God is communal that has helped them to be generous to recognize that Christians need facilities even in Muslim countries, for they cannot, as the Muslims themselves do not do, worship individually in back rooms of their apartments. So here you will see migrant workers, such as Pilipinoes and Indians, come together in formation of a local Christian community. These migrant workers are not “picking and choosing” to “select the place of worship” that “best suits their individual ‘needs’ and ‘conscience.’” They are creating new communities by virtue of their being Christian, and needing new churches to satisfy that need. They aren’t flipping through the yellow pages in order to go to the place that they are “most comfortable with” because it’s a “fair place” and “matches my needs.” They are pilgrims who bring the need for their church with them upon their backs. They are the ones who understand God’s gift to them of community based worship, not cafeteria or non-denominational personality based and demand free “individual choice.”
And now I must say something that I do not enjoy, but I do not want to be accused of neglecting the validity of the faith of others. I have always been fond of the Dali Lama as a person, and as a spiritual personage. But I cannot relate to a religious leader who left his one and only faith community behind. It’s not like Tibetan Buddhists are misnamed Global Buddhists. When Tibet was claimed by China, the body of the faithful who in my Abrahamic view of religion needed their leader to stay. It is not like during the capture of Israel by the Babylonians that the Jewish priests cut and run. The Jewish priests went along into captivity with their people. I mention this example because there you have one body, one community of faithful, with one leadership, exactly as the situation was in Tibet. It’s not like he moved “his flag from one command ship to the other.” Now, I read his books and I understand that he was a young man and pressured to flee. But once one is older, and one sees that one’s people are left behind, why does one not return to them, if one truly believes their faith and destiny? Celebrities and the secular politics latched onto him, and I mourned that, for that demarked the end of the legitimate community of worship. And of course, in the Catholic faith, the cardinals wear red for a reason.
I hope that you all, especially the young people, who, like Pope John Paul II, are always on my mind, find this useful, although perhaps a cross to bear in understanding. God never intended his word, his instructions and his institutions to be reduced to what one individual “evaluates” that he or she is “most comfortable with” or finds the “fairest.” To help, here is an analogy.
Suppose that God gave humans a set of blueprints for their individual homes that were absolutely fail proof. If one followed the instructions and built the three bedrooms, two bath all mod con home exactly according to instructions it would last a lifetime, be safe, affordable and easy to maintain, withstanding even harsh weather. So for several thousand years family after family built their houses and passed the blueprint from God on to their children.
Now, we have the “Do your own thing” generation that thinks it is demonstrated its wisdom by rejecting what the old folks say (and having a few puffs on weed while they are at it). They say, “Why should we believe that these blueprints are ‘the best?’” Should we not shop for “options?” So many of them do not use the blueprints at all. Others make “modifications” that “correct stupid mistakes.” For example, they take out the cellar because “Who needs a cellar?” And then they do not understand when the old folks tell them that in a tornado, to go into the storm shelter in the cellar. Huh? Others decide that “aliens” are “filled with wisdom” and are “channeling advanced and spiritual blueprints” and they either build houses based on that, or they endlessly doodle what they think they are hearing from “aliens,” or they live in traditional houses paid for by gulliable people who buy their books containing “alien blueprints.”
Eventually an entirely obsessive compulsive generation of home builders arises. They follow the blueprints given by God to their parents but with one exception. They spend a day building a wall, and the next day they knock down that wall. The day after that they raise the wall again, and then the day after that they knock that wall down again. And the next day they build a second wall, because it’s “the right time” to build that particular wall, and then the day after that they tear down that wall again.
That is what happens when a generation does not understand that true wisdom is accumulated and handed down, and that the body of information is not meant to be “reinvented” over and over again. That’s almost as stupid as if someone declared that it is passé to breathe oxygen, and from now on the truly enlightened will only breathe hydrogen. I mean, belief in breathing oxygen is so old fashioned and oppressive. Who is God or our ancestors to tell us to breathe oxygen? That is what it is like to deny fundamental truths and fundamental healthy community of worship as given to humans by God and God alone. These people will tell you that the “blueprint drawers” were “oppressed” and that is why they have “three bedrooms” because in the “patriarchal bourgeois society of the past the women were forced to be demeaned” and that this shows that God and the blueprints from him are “mistranslated” or the “rest of societal oppression.”
I may seem that I’ve strayed from the original point but I have not at all. There is an arrogant affectation that will result in the end of humanity that arises from the modern notion that “individuals decide what is best for them” and that only old pagan beliefs are good, while old truths that God has taught are “bad or at least questionable.” They ignore saints who were pagans, who were intellectuals, like St. Justin, who looked at pagan and Christian dogma side by side and chose Christianity, recognizing the truth of it. But today, many of the middle aged and older people grew up with a belief that “if it is old it is good, unless it is Christianity.” I’m hopeful and very prayerful that the younger people are beginning to see the error in logic of their parents. Why are “runes” so enlightening while the Bible is not? Who cares what the Pharaohs thought, because they are dead now aren’t they? I mean, if they were such geniuses and so holy and smart, where are they now? Hmm. Who is there instead? The children of the true Abrahamic faiths: Muslims and Christians. But your parents’ generation, dear children, because they wanted to be self proclaimed priests and priestesses, glommed onto anything old and rotten so that they could have libertine lifestyles and call themselves “special” and “enlightened.” And as a result, young people, they are teaching you out of textbooks of rotten skulls and cat box dung.
No one knows humans better than God, obviously, because he knows everything, he created humans, and he knows everything they do and what they will choose to do in the future. Yet God did two things because he loves humans. He gave them free will to make their own decisions, and he gave them the safest and most joyous blueprints possible, knowing what they need to live, thrive, and hopefully, choose to find Him and be saved. What have your parents given you? Have they passed on to you the blueprints that they received from God through their parents? Or have they passed onto you something else? Think about it.
God bless those who seek and find.
Friday, July 25, 2008
Personal story re innocent hobby ruined by cultists
I used to be very fond of studying certain eras in English history. My first ex-husband was the one who got me interested in the first place, since he was a history major at university. He got me interested in reading about Elizabethan England because of the Armada battle and the very interesting economic and social implications. Eventually I collected books and artifacts from several interesting periods of English history.
One day I made a joke that I realized only years later probably contributed to my being assaulted by cultists. It was when I was interested in the period of history called "The Steven and Matilda Wars." I found it a very interesting era because 1) it was pre-medieval and hence a fascinating time for human cultural development and 2) it involved two heirs, one being a woman, fighting for the throne of England. So I was well immersed in reading for pleasure about this period in English history when one day I had to give a talk at work, introducing a new project and the new consultant who would be hired to do the project. As I stood in front of the approximately twenty bank manager colleagues of mine, my boss whispered in my ear, "The consultant is not coming; he decided to take another job." So here were all these managers looking at me. I decided to bring some humor into the situation, since I liked them (not realizing many were cultist snakes) and wanted to make a friendly gesture of humor as a bonding. My boss was a great guy and very fun loving and funny himself, so I took a page from his playbook of clowning around a bit. So I said something like:
"The consultant has decided to take another job, so he is not showing up. Therefore we can't really launch this project right now. So instead I will lecture you on the Steven and Matilda wars." I then spent a few minutes telling them adventure stories (there's a famous escape that is much like St. Paul's escape down a wall) that I especially enjoyed, while they looked at me stunned. My boss thought it was hilarious. It was not a waste of time since the meeting hour had been divided into three parts, and so I just joked for a few minutes in lieu of my twenty minutes. Then I gave the floor to the next person. This was in the mid to latter 1980's, sometime after 1985.
I did not realize that ferocious and anti-Christian cultists were actively stalking me at the time and were looking for "clues" of me "remembering" my so called "past lives." Yep, you guessed it. It was a joke that ended up being on me in a horrible way, as they viewed this as further "justification" that the mean s*** otherwise known as "reincarnation" "exists" (it most assuredly does not). And of course with the "military" and "war" nature of what I was relating in the stories of Ye Olde Merry England, they viewed this as more reason to beef me in the most hurtful backstabbing (and I mean that in a few ways, not just one) methods possible.
Anyway, while I have your attention, did you know that King Egbert of England was viewed as the first real "King" of England because he was able to unify four counties (and for a while, through conquest, a fifth) under him? Each county had it's own king during that time, so he was the first to be recognized as King over all 4/5 of the counties.
Have a nice day and thank you for your attention.
One day I made a joke that I realized only years later probably contributed to my being assaulted by cultists. It was when I was interested in the period of history called "The Steven and Matilda Wars." I found it a very interesting era because 1) it was pre-medieval and hence a fascinating time for human cultural development and 2) it involved two heirs, one being a woman, fighting for the throne of England. So I was well immersed in reading for pleasure about this period in English history when one day I had to give a talk at work, introducing a new project and the new consultant who would be hired to do the project. As I stood in front of the approximately twenty bank manager colleagues of mine, my boss whispered in my ear, "The consultant is not coming; he decided to take another job." So here were all these managers looking at me. I decided to bring some humor into the situation, since I liked them (not realizing many were cultist snakes) and wanted to make a friendly gesture of humor as a bonding. My boss was a great guy and very fun loving and funny himself, so I took a page from his playbook of clowning around a bit. So I said something like:
"The consultant has decided to take another job, so he is not showing up. Therefore we can't really launch this project right now. So instead I will lecture you on the Steven and Matilda wars." I then spent a few minutes telling them adventure stories (there's a famous escape that is much like St. Paul's escape down a wall) that I especially enjoyed, while they looked at me stunned. My boss thought it was hilarious. It was not a waste of time since the meeting hour had been divided into three parts, and so I just joked for a few minutes in lieu of my twenty minutes. Then I gave the floor to the next person. This was in the mid to latter 1980's, sometime after 1985.
I did not realize that ferocious and anti-Christian cultists were actively stalking me at the time and were looking for "clues" of me "remembering" my so called "past lives." Yep, you guessed it. It was a joke that ended up being on me in a horrible way, as they viewed this as further "justification" that the mean s*** otherwise known as "reincarnation" "exists" (it most assuredly does not). And of course with the "military" and "war" nature of what I was relating in the stories of Ye Olde Merry England, they viewed this as more reason to beef me in the most hurtful backstabbing (and I mean that in a few ways, not just one) methods possible.
Anyway, while I have your attention, did you know that King Egbert of England was viewed as the first real "King" of England because he was able to unify four counties (and for a while, through conquest, a fifth) under him? Each county had it's own king during that time, so he was the first to be recognized as King over all 4/5 of the counties.
Have a nice day and thank you for your attention.
People might forgive too soon
Two nights ago just before my evening prayers I had an ominous feeling that people who had wronged me, grievously wronged me, around thirty years ago were going to be severely chastised by God. While these people have done nothing to indicate atonement and certainly have done nothing spiritually or materially generous in recompense in my direction, I was moved to pray to God for him to have mercy on them.
Even I, who knows God very, very well, was surprised at the rebuke that I received. I don't mean like I was yelled at or something went wrong to me, but I viewed a very swift chastisement of people who have benefited materially by my being wronged. I was given to understand quite clearly by God that I am not to forgive people who do not repent, atone, and ask for forgiveness. God describes it with this kind of image, that a person being beaten and tortured cannot have the torturers scream at her "forgive us" while they assault her further.
I thought I would share this communication because I wrote recently on this very topic, and there has been a pressure put upon pious people to "forgive," even before the sinner or criminal has made even nominal admission of guilt and regret.
So, sorry a-holes, but I'm not to forgive anyone for anything, even though I reluctantly, but sincerely, tried (half knowing the answer in advance but still surprised at how swiftly God responded to demonstrate that his chastisement, even decades later, will come to those who refuse to repent). Additionally, do remember that God promises that his vengence for wrongs to him and against the innocent will fall on multiple generations (since those who benefit, especially materially, from their parents' trangressions will also have to pay for the injustice). Therefore, a delay in chastisement often only means that God will chastise multiple generations, and I've seen some examples of that recently. It's not like the Bible hasn't made that abundantly clear. "Experts" ought to be more thorough in their Bible study and not cherry pick.
Even I, who knows God very, very well, was surprised at the rebuke that I received. I don't mean like I was yelled at or something went wrong to me, but I viewed a very swift chastisement of people who have benefited materially by my being wronged. I was given to understand quite clearly by God that I am not to forgive people who do not repent, atone, and ask for forgiveness. God describes it with this kind of image, that a person being beaten and tortured cannot have the torturers scream at her "forgive us" while they assault her further.
I thought I would share this communication because I wrote recently on this very topic, and there has been a pressure put upon pious people to "forgive," even before the sinner or criminal has made even nominal admission of guilt and regret.
So, sorry a-holes, but I'm not to forgive anyone for anything, even though I reluctantly, but sincerely, tried (half knowing the answer in advance but still surprised at how swiftly God responded to demonstrate that his chastisement, even decades later, will come to those who refuse to repent). Additionally, do remember that God promises that his vengence for wrongs to him and against the innocent will fall on multiple generations (since those who benefit, especially materially, from their parents' trangressions will also have to pay for the injustice). Therefore, a delay in chastisement often only means that God will chastise multiple generations, and I've seen some examples of that recently. It's not like the Bible hasn't made that abundantly clear. "Experts" ought to be more thorough in their Bible study and not cherry pick.
Very fine article re St Louis diocese adoration
This is one of the nicest articles I've seen about the 24 hour a day 7 day a week adoration of the physical presence of Jesus Christ, in the Holy Eucharist, known as perpetual adoration. If you read this even non Christians will understand much more about this devotion, just by reading about the people who do it, rather than the theology. You'll all find this very enlightening. And to those everywhere in the world who contribute, it makes a great difference, it really does.
http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/religion/story/3701575B8FDD3BCB86257491000DE215?OpenDocument
snip
ST. PAUL — Stepping into the chapel with Bible in hand, Debbie Mueller touches her fingertips to a tiny basin of Holy Water and gets ready to pray. It's nearly 3 a.m.
She signs her name into a log book, and turns to say hello to Don Ziegemeier, who is kneeling in one of the pews nearby. He's been there since 2 a.m.
In front of them on a white altar, two candles glow inside red glass holders on each side of a cross. In the center is the monstrance, a special vessel containing the consecrated host that Catholics believe is the body of Christ.
This is the perpetual adoration chapel at St. Paul Catholic Church, where Mueller, Ziegemeier and other volunteers pray 24 hours a day, seven days a week, nearly 365 days a year. (The chapel is dark for 50 hours leading up to Easter.)
http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/religion/story/3701575B8FDD3BCB86257491000DE215?OpenDocument
snip
ST. PAUL — Stepping into the chapel with Bible in hand, Debbie Mueller touches her fingertips to a tiny basin of Holy Water and gets ready to pray. It's nearly 3 a.m.
She signs her name into a log book, and turns to say hello to Don Ziegemeier, who is kneeling in one of the pews nearby. He's been there since 2 a.m.
In front of them on a white altar, two candles glow inside red glass holders on each side of a cross. In the center is the monstrance, a special vessel containing the consecrated host that Catholics believe is the body of Christ.
This is the perpetual adoration chapel at St. Paul Catholic Church, where Mueller, Ziegemeier and other volunteers pray 24 hours a day, seven days a week, nearly 365 days a year. (The chapel is dark for 50 hours leading up to Easter.)
Thursday, July 24, 2008
Important study about harmful chemicals
Do read this.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2008067309_toxicsmell23m0.html
***
Here's a quick historic/science/economics lesson that everyone needs to understand because globally we are getting into a horrible situation and people don't even realize it is happening, or why.
Up until the industrial revolution humans had to use natural materials in everything. Let me use the example of dye to color fabric. Everyone had to collect bugs, bark, plants, flowers, minerals and other materials (such as a certain sea shell to provide purple, which due to its rareness became "the color of royalty") in order to give fabric or anything else any color. During the industrial revolution people discovered how to use chemicals, man made chemicals, to do the same thing. When you collect something that is rare to do something everyone needs to do (color fabric) it is very expensive and limiting. When you invent a chemical that can be cheaply made and used, it becomes available and affordable worldwide. So, for example, one of the first things traders provided American Indians was fabric colored with chemicals, the same way the settlers used on their own clothes. Everyone thought it was a great idea, and it was. Now, think of everything else that is like dyes going from natural to chemical. Fragrance is another area where it is no longer made from the actual flowers, but a synthetic chemical. Food additives for taste and freshness used to be natural (sugar, salt, vinegar) but are now all chemicals. Again, this is a "good thing" in the sense of making a commodity more widely available and affordable to everyone. Now think about cleansers. They used to be based on natural substances such as fat, oil, lye, and ashes. Even the cleansers are now all chemicals.
So now do the math. Everything we use is saturated and enabled with chemicals that take the place of what were natural substances. And it's not just a "natural vs artificial chemical" problem, but it is dosage related, and THAT is the real problem. In the 1800's if everything else you did was based on low dosages of natural materials, but now you started wearing cotton that is colored with a chemical dye, no problem. The people got low dosages of chemicals in limited areas. But gradually chemicals have become the basis of every substance, increasing the dosage within that object AND multiplying a person's exposure by one hundred fold. Here is what I mean. Natural dyes tend not to be as intense as chemical dyes. So when you use a natural compound you are somewhat limited in your exposure because it's a weaker substance. When a chemist invents a substitute though, there is no built in dosage control. So a dull red piece of naturally colored fabric is forced to have a much lower amount of the natural dye in it than a chemically treated fabric, which becomes saturated with the chemical. So that is one way to understand that chemicals, even if they "mimic" the natural are genuinely different and more risky because they are not dosage controlled.
Here's a food example just to help with the concept. People used to never drink fruit juice (except wine), they would eat the fruit. So a person was lucky and well off if they had say an apple or an orange a day. But how many oranges do you think must be squeezed in order to make a small, to say nothing of a large, glass of orange juice? (This is why it's so fattening to drink juice and not so good for your kids. It is MUCH better to have your kid eat an apple than always drink the apple juice, for example). That's another subject but I know it helps you to understand what I mean by dosage of intensity. So just like an orange can be eaten, or three or four oranges can be "drank" in one sitting, natural substances are by their nature more dilute than chemical imitations or replacements.
So now do the math. If in a period of one hundred years humans have gone from replacing virtually every everyday substance in their lives with chemical based ones instead of natural, you have increased your exposure to each chemical on a per unit basis and you cannot escape chemical use because it is in everything. This is terrible and trust me, it is behind many of the ailments people complain about today. It's no one's "fault" so don't be dumb and run for lawyers because it was a "necessary" step in progress. Remember, people didn't live much beyond their fifties or sixties one hundred years ago, in general, and so improving, even chemically, the health and cleanliness of their lives in one or two areas meant prosperity and a longer life could be achieved. The problem is that 1) now people live longer and are exposed to chemicals even in the womb and through their whole lives 2) there are a hundred fold more types of chemical exposures because it's in everything everywhere and 3) humans do not have the time to "evolve" and "natural select" a bodily response (if it would be even possible), so many more sensitivities and reactions are to be expected since the human race can't evolve "tolerance" to say some cancer causing additive since that would take like ten thousand years or so to do it.
So instead of worrying about climate change you better worry about this problem. We need to get people who are not extreme on either side of the issue to inventory every chemical and examine the full range of implications and options for its usage. SAFETY STUDIES MEAN NOTHING in this regard. Safety studies only test one chemical on one person or animal. I'm talking about the fact that humans now live within and pee out of them hundreds of chemicals coming at them from every direction constantly so that basically humans are getting hundreds of doses of chemicals (each of which, like the fabric to the early settlers) may be harmless if that were the only thing, but now it combines with hundreds of others in daily exposure AND it continues to circulate in the environment both during their manufacture, their disposal in garbage AND through human bodily functions. It is a global crisis and it has been building for decades now. Universities and researchers ought to develop the "chemical additive profile" that the vast majority of humans are exposed to and divide up among themselves studying the implications and where the dosage and intensity can be mitigated. Pollution specialists need to also focus more on the every day chemicals instead of only the famous toxic dump and waste remedial processes. Consumers need to just be aware that there are no longer real rose petals in even "rose scented," and there are no pine needles in "pine fresh"... it is all chemicals that mimic the fragrance but are not the same chemical composition and even if they were, they are exponentially intensive AND they are contained and transported (like in an aerosol) by other chemicals.
I could write much more but I think everyone gets the point. It's a mess, I'm not going to lie to you and say this is a minor problem or that it will be easy to fix (and if people will even be able to stand to focus on more 'bad news' and get consensus that it must be remedied). But you can start to do things in your own household now that I've filled you in on what is going on. That's one reason I'm such a glass fan. But even that would need looking into because we can no longer be sure what enters into the manufacturing process. But you manage your odds because, for example, if there's no color decoration on the glass I know I'm not dealing with a color dye substance, nor a plastic issue, etc. So you can minimize your exposures. I've written about this before, how I use old fashion soap where I can, and not chemical laden cleansers, even using tea bags in water for cleaning surface. But someone somewhere has got to get on top of this problem. Hmm.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2008067309_toxicsmell23m0.html
***
Here's a quick historic/science/economics lesson that everyone needs to understand because globally we are getting into a horrible situation and people don't even realize it is happening, or why.
Up until the industrial revolution humans had to use natural materials in everything. Let me use the example of dye to color fabric. Everyone had to collect bugs, bark, plants, flowers, minerals and other materials (such as a certain sea shell to provide purple, which due to its rareness became "the color of royalty") in order to give fabric or anything else any color. During the industrial revolution people discovered how to use chemicals, man made chemicals, to do the same thing. When you collect something that is rare to do something everyone needs to do (color fabric) it is very expensive and limiting. When you invent a chemical that can be cheaply made and used, it becomes available and affordable worldwide. So, for example, one of the first things traders provided American Indians was fabric colored with chemicals, the same way the settlers used on their own clothes. Everyone thought it was a great idea, and it was. Now, think of everything else that is like dyes going from natural to chemical. Fragrance is another area where it is no longer made from the actual flowers, but a synthetic chemical. Food additives for taste and freshness used to be natural (sugar, salt, vinegar) but are now all chemicals. Again, this is a "good thing" in the sense of making a commodity more widely available and affordable to everyone. Now think about cleansers. They used to be based on natural substances such as fat, oil, lye, and ashes. Even the cleansers are now all chemicals.
So now do the math. Everything we use is saturated and enabled with chemicals that take the place of what were natural substances. And it's not just a "natural vs artificial chemical" problem, but it is dosage related, and THAT is the real problem. In the 1800's if everything else you did was based on low dosages of natural materials, but now you started wearing cotton that is colored with a chemical dye, no problem. The people got low dosages of chemicals in limited areas. But gradually chemicals have become the basis of every substance, increasing the dosage within that object AND multiplying a person's exposure by one hundred fold. Here is what I mean. Natural dyes tend not to be as intense as chemical dyes. So when you use a natural compound you are somewhat limited in your exposure because it's a weaker substance. When a chemist invents a substitute though, there is no built in dosage control. So a dull red piece of naturally colored fabric is forced to have a much lower amount of the natural dye in it than a chemically treated fabric, which becomes saturated with the chemical. So that is one way to understand that chemicals, even if they "mimic" the natural are genuinely different and more risky because they are not dosage controlled.
Here's a food example just to help with the concept. People used to never drink fruit juice (except wine), they would eat the fruit. So a person was lucky and well off if they had say an apple or an orange a day. But how many oranges do you think must be squeezed in order to make a small, to say nothing of a large, glass of orange juice? (This is why it's so fattening to drink juice and not so good for your kids. It is MUCH better to have your kid eat an apple than always drink the apple juice, for example). That's another subject but I know it helps you to understand what I mean by dosage of intensity. So just like an orange can be eaten, or three or four oranges can be "drank" in one sitting, natural substances are by their nature more dilute than chemical imitations or replacements.
So now do the math. If in a period of one hundred years humans have gone from replacing virtually every everyday substance in their lives with chemical based ones instead of natural, you have increased your exposure to each chemical on a per unit basis and you cannot escape chemical use because it is in everything. This is terrible and trust me, it is behind many of the ailments people complain about today. It's no one's "fault" so don't be dumb and run for lawyers because it was a "necessary" step in progress. Remember, people didn't live much beyond their fifties or sixties one hundred years ago, in general, and so improving, even chemically, the health and cleanliness of their lives in one or two areas meant prosperity and a longer life could be achieved. The problem is that 1) now people live longer and are exposed to chemicals even in the womb and through their whole lives 2) there are a hundred fold more types of chemical exposures because it's in everything everywhere and 3) humans do not have the time to "evolve" and "natural select" a bodily response (if it would be even possible), so many more sensitivities and reactions are to be expected since the human race can't evolve "tolerance" to say some cancer causing additive since that would take like ten thousand years or so to do it.
So instead of worrying about climate change you better worry about this problem. We need to get people who are not extreme on either side of the issue to inventory every chemical and examine the full range of implications and options for its usage. SAFETY STUDIES MEAN NOTHING in this regard. Safety studies only test one chemical on one person or animal. I'm talking about the fact that humans now live within and pee out of them hundreds of chemicals coming at them from every direction constantly so that basically humans are getting hundreds of doses of chemicals (each of which, like the fabric to the early settlers) may be harmless if that were the only thing, but now it combines with hundreds of others in daily exposure AND it continues to circulate in the environment both during their manufacture, their disposal in garbage AND through human bodily functions. It is a global crisis and it has been building for decades now. Universities and researchers ought to develop the "chemical additive profile" that the vast majority of humans are exposed to and divide up among themselves studying the implications and where the dosage and intensity can be mitigated. Pollution specialists need to also focus more on the every day chemicals instead of only the famous toxic dump and waste remedial processes. Consumers need to just be aware that there are no longer real rose petals in even "rose scented," and there are no pine needles in "pine fresh"... it is all chemicals that mimic the fragrance but are not the same chemical composition and even if they were, they are exponentially intensive AND they are contained and transported (like in an aerosol) by other chemicals.
I could write much more but I think everyone gets the point. It's a mess, I'm not going to lie to you and say this is a minor problem or that it will be easy to fix (and if people will even be able to stand to focus on more 'bad news' and get consensus that it must be remedied). But you can start to do things in your own household now that I've filled you in on what is going on. That's one reason I'm such a glass fan. But even that would need looking into because we can no longer be sure what enters into the manufacturing process. But you manage your odds because, for example, if there's no color decoration on the glass I know I'm not dealing with a color dye substance, nor a plastic issue, etc. So you can minimize your exposures. I've written about this before, how I use old fashion soap where I can, and not chemical laden cleansers, even using tea bags in water for cleaning surface. But someone somewhere has got to get on top of this problem. Hmm.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
