Daily Archives: March 14, 2012

George Grant Revisited

Wednesday, March 14, 2012
Thumbnail


In the course of my research on the question of human relationship to emerging digital technologies and their environments, I’ve read from two books by the Canadian nationalist and philosopher George Grant. Grant was once a fixture on the Canadian intellectual landscape, roaming alongside other giants like Marshall McLuhan and Northrop Frye in the 1970s heyday that put the University of Toronto on the radar screen of the world. It was an era, it seems, that produced a set of remarkably penetrating and prophetic thinkers.

In his 1969 book Technology and Empire, Grant (incidentally, the uncle of erstwhile politician Michael Ignatieff), lamented that the idea of progress had lost its connection to moral development and had been co-opted into a utilitarian mastery of nature to satisfy human appetites. He was not blind to the multitude of benefits wrought by science and technology, and struggled to hold them in tension with his growing criticism of the emerging technologized man, but he did so confident that it was because we had internalized technology as a way of thinking, and could not step outside ourselves “to see the forest for the trees.”
He wrote:

We can hold in our minds the enormous benefits of technological society, but we cannot so easily hold the ways it may have deprived us, because technique is ourselves. All descriptions or definitions of technique which place it outside ourselves hide it from us what it is…

Grant also realized that the post-modern rejection of any and all meta-narratives to describe the meaning of human existence — the philosophical jettisoning of metaphysics — and the consequent impossibility of holding any objective

end

or purpose of the human person, meant that there were no criteria to guide technological development other than a certain “inevitability”. Certainly it seems today, with the rapid advancements in everything from biotechnology to smart phones, that we lack any ultimately stabilizing ethics because we lack teleology, a shared understanding of the “final ends” that give meaning to life. When it comes to technology, just because we can, so it seems we inevitably must.

Grant held that the freedom to advance scientifically was the only conceivable notion of freedom that our society would understand, because now knowledge and meaning could only be revealed through the scientific method:

Every development of technique is an exercise of freedom by those who develop it, and as the exercise of freedom is the only meaning, the [technological] changes can only be publicly known as the unfolding of meaning.

Grant poses the question whether we might acknowledge the existence of “presence” as something that might limit (in a philosophical sense) or guide the creation of our artifices and devices. It is a notion that reminds me of Heidegger’s notion of Being, a way of speaking about God in the world without involving the God of revelation:



Despite the noblest modern thought, which teaches always the exaltation of potentiality above all that is, has anyone been able to show us conclusively throughout a comprehensive account of both the human and non-human things, that we must discard the idea of a presence above which potentiality cannot be exalted? In such a situation of uncertainty, it would be lacking in courage to turn one’s face to the wall, even if one can find no fulfillment in working for or celebrating the dynamo. Equally it would be immoderate and uncourageous and perhaps unwise to live in the midst of our present drive, merely working in it and celebrating it, and not also listening or watching or simply waiting for intimations of deprival which might lead us to see the beautiful as the image, in the world, of the good.

In the end, Grant is asking how we might also be observant to what we are losing in the midst of all our gains. His concern is for “the beautiful”, which is an image of “the good”, a sense that can only be cultivated by contemplation.

Nearly twenty years later, Grant would return to this theme with a book, Technology and Justice (1986), in which he essentially reprised the need for metaphysical principles to guide our technological development:

For those who affirm that the justice or injustice of some actions can be known in advance of the necessities of time and of the calculation of means, there is a pressing need to understand our technological destiny from principles more comprehensive than its own…. We are called to understand technological civilization just when its very realization has radically put in question the possibility that there could be any such understanding.

Grant’s take on modernity was certainly critical, even pessimistic, but he viewed that as keeping with his role as a philosopher. Although he always seems to have remained uneasy about the direction the postmodern world — and especially his beloved Canada — was going, there was beneath it all, a sense of hope, and even, dare I say, of humour. I think both his concern and hope emerge at times this 1973 interview. For the section where he speaks about technology and society, scroll to 11:16:

Grant’s cause is the restoration of our creaturely sense of

wonder

in life, recoverable when we realize again that “we are not alone”. By this he means that we can recover our true selves only when we recover our true meaning in God. In

The George Grant Reader

(University of Toronto Press, 1998)

he can be read saying:



It may perhaps be said negatively that what has been absent for us is the affirmation of a possible apprehension of the world beyond that as a field of objects considered as pragmata — an apprehension present not only in its height as “theory” but as the undergirding of our loves and friendships, of our arts and reverences, and indeed as the setting for dealing with the objects of the human and the non-human world. Perhaps we are lacking the recognition that our response to the whole should not most deeply be that of doing, nor even that of terror and anguish, but that of wondering or marveling at what is, being amazed or astonished by it…; and that such a stance, as beyond all bargains and conveniences, is the only source from which purposes may be manifest to us for our necessary calculating.

In another brilliantly engaging book,

Ordering Love: Liberal Societies and the Memory of God

(2011), theologian and philosopher David L. Schindler takes a look at Grant, and to answer the charge of pessimism and utopianism, cites Sheila Grant, the late philosopher’s widow, who shared a simple statement that her husband had repeated throughout his life: “It always matters what each of us does.”

If one believes that the spiritual life is open to all, as Grant did, pessimism cannot be the final word. Schindler believes that Grant points us to what is ultimately the only credible response to charges that we are being unrealistic: the witness of “each one’s entire way of life, as carried in the whole of one’s countless concrete acts, thoughts and gestures.” In other words, what the Second Vatican Council identifies as the universal vocation to holiness.

Read original article:  

George Grant Revisited

Read More

Dickens, McLuhan and the B.V.M.

Wednesday, March 14, 2012
Thumbnail

There is a

story

in Britain’s

The Catholic Herald

about the night Charles Dickens may have had a vision of the Virgin Mary. The English novelist was certainly no Catholic, and at times revealed his own prejudices about “popery”, typical of his time. Yet this unusual account reveals how quickly Catholicism leapt to Dickens’ mind, in a moment of rather dramatic religious experience.

It’s worth reading in its entirety, but here is the kernel of the account, from a letter Dickens wrote to his biographer John Forster:




Let me tell you of a curious dream I had, last Monday night; and of the fragments of reality I can collect; which helped to make it up … In an indistinct place, which was quite sublime in its indistinctness, I was visited by a Spirit. I could not make out the face, nor do I recollect that I desired to do so. It wore a blue drapery, as the Madonna might in a picture by Raphael; and bore no resemblance to any one I have known except in stature … It was so full of compassion and sorrow for me… that it cut me to the heart; and I said, sobbing, ‘Oh! give me some token that you have really visited me!… Answer me one… question!’ I said, in an agony of entreaty lest it should leave me. ‘What is the True religion?’ As it paused a moment without replying, I said – Good God in such an agony of haste, lest it should go away! – ’You think, as I do, that the Form of religion does not so greatly matter, if we try to do good? or,’ I said, observing that it still hesitated, and was moved with the greatest compassion for me, ‘perhaps the Roman Catholic is the best? perhaps it makes one think of God oftener, and believe in him more steadily?’

‘For you,’ said the Spirit, full of such heavenly tenderness for me, that I felt as if my heart would break; ‘for you it is the best!’ Then I awoke, with the tears running down my face, and myself in exactly the condition of the dream. It was just dawn.



Dickens, of course, never became a Catholic (that we know of), but it is interesting to speculate about what this mystical experience was. Was the Madonna sent to warn him, a maternal Marley to a relatively benign but searching Scrooge, that his soul would be best served in the Church of the poor — the very folk he championed? Dickens is known as an early advocate of social justice in the industrial age, and his heart (and humour) for humanity comes out in his many memorable characters. Perhaps this love of his called forth the love of heaven, both to ratify and encourage.


He had a direct connection with the Blessed Virgin Mary. He alluded to it very briefly once, almost fearfully, in a please-don’t-laugh-at-me tone. He didn’t say, ‘I knew because the Blessed Virgin Mary told me,’ but was clear from what he said that one of reasons he was sure about certain things was that the Virgin had certified his understanding of them. I have a feeling we have a saint in the wings.

While probably not a visionary in the literal sense, the anecdote suggests that McLuhan may have had an intimate spiritual link with the Mother of God, although, as with all things intimate, we may never know exactly what that meant. But devoted to her, it seems, he was.

“At a time like this,” McLuhan remarked in a 1971 interview, “there is a very great role for her to play, because the things that we now have to study in the world are rather tremendous, and new.”

McLuhan was deeply, though privately, concerned about electronic media obstructing real communion between people. In a letter to Jacques Maritain he shared his fears that the emerging “electronic consciousness” might be a dangerous “facsimile of the body of Christ”. Behind the sometimes stiff demeanour of the celebrated professor was a heart concerned for the modern poor: the digitally stuffed, but spiritually deprived.

Marshall McLuhan (1911-1980)

The experiences of these two literati underline Mary’s special role in the unfolding drama of the world. She is the feminine and the maternal, calling all to friendship with God and fellow creature. She has always been the figure that points to Jesus, especially when accessibility to her Son may otherwise be difficult or obstructed. She calls hearts to repentance. She intervenes when humanity is about to make big mistakes, and begs us to pray more. Sometimes she cries. Her mission appears to be that of helping the great hapless “we” reach the final communion with her Son in the Trinitarian vision.

If both Dickens and McLuhan had special Marian connections, I believe it was because they both loved the family of God in their own quite distinct ways. Perhaps their particular genius and sensitivity — like that of many saints and scholars — made them receptive to the ministrations and mercies of heaven. Mostly, however, I see the longing, hidden but implicit in their works, for a unity that encompasses both heaven and earth, a union of hearts and minds that can only be called ecclesial, in an ultimate sense.

G.K. Chesterton’s 1906 biography of Dickens, a book that sparked a revival of interest in the novelist’s work (T.S. Eliot would call it the “best on that author that has ever been written”), ends with this rather moving passage:

Comradeship and serious joy are not interludes in our travel; but… rather our travels are interludes in comradeship and joy, which through God shall endure for ever. The inn does not point to the road; the road points to the inn. And all roads point at last to an ultimate inn, where we shall meet Dickens and all his characters; and when we drink again it shall be from the great flagons in the tavern at the end of the world.

The joys of eschatological friendship and merriment are common undercurrents in Chesterton’s works. Perhaps Dickens’ nocturnal vision, like McLuhan’s “intimate connection”, was a foretaste of that great celestial family gathering, a specially-granted “inn-stop” with the mother for the sake of the journey home. May we all make it there safely.

Read More:  

Dickens, McLuhan and the B.V.M.

Read More

The hijacking of language and moral discourse

Wednesday, March 14, 2012
Thumbnail

Kathleen Sebelius, the United States Secretary of Health and
Human Services, made this ludicrous observation: religious employers can in good conscience pay for abortions and contraceptives because nobody would
really be paying for these services. Why? Once you lower birth rates then
health care costs drop. This is an argument trying to rationalize the immoral. How can this lady who represents the Obama government
make such an absurd statement? Have some politicians completely unhinged their reasoning skills from reality? Do our elected representatives really believe the
public is so gullible?

The abortion deception as lower health costs

A case can be made that the erosion of language use and the disregard for the meaning of words are the result of a general decline in respect people have
for each other. This is happening in our private lives, in our social
interactions and our places of work. It’s also taking place in government
institutions, in our schools, in the media and the public square. The language of moral discourse these days has been hijacked. If one is not talking in politically correct sound bites of inclusiveness and diversity, your soon accused of being bigoted, homophobic and racist.

How did we come to disregard the whole connection that words should have to reality, as well as the entire communication process? It begins with believing that we each have the “freedom” to delink words from any reference to the real world. If for example, we talk
about a flower, say a “carnation”, the word must represent and refer to the flower in the
real world. This is the logical thought connection between words and reality: we start with the
word/symbol, “flower”, our mind associates it with the actual
thing/flower in the physical world and the word takes on a meaning. Simply put, this is how much of human communication takes place.
Once we decouple words and reality we end up saying
illogical things like Sebelius: a nation can save money on health care by
providing for its citizens free state sponsored “reproductive
services”. Now we are not supposed to think about the real meaning of
“reproductive services” except as an euphemism for something that is
normally good. After all, we are talking about positive sounding words such as “health”,
“free” and “services”. But what’s the truth? To begin with, government health care is not “free” since taxpayers fund it.
Next, “reproductive services” hides the
meaning of what is being said: in plain language Sebelius, with the support of
President Obama, is saying that killing the unborn will save the nation money.
How does a nation do this: by paying for contraceptives, abortifacients,
sterilizations and the direct killing of babies through abortion. This is
exactly how we pay for the culture of death in Canada: we call it the Canada Health Act.
When we bring the test of truth to the language
used when it comes to “reproductive health” the entire argument takes
on a totally different meaning. We are really talking about killing other human
beings. There’s nothing “free” about the whole sordid and immoral
affair: Sebelius merely masks the truth of what she says by not telling her
listeners that her way to cost reduction in health care will come by
killing more babies. This reduces population growth. Fewer babies born
means lower health costs in the future. Let’s push this absurd reasoning and reveal the truth: health costs will eventually be reduced to nothing when the population declines to zero. This is unethical madness.
In addition, this immoral argument continues this
way: with more abortions the nation doesn’t pay for pre-natal care, childbirth
and child care. So overall health care costs are reduced. But this is a moral, human and financial scam. In hijacking the language, this position tries to turn a
lie into a truth. The fact is that children will pay the greatest cost when you
kill them in the womb. You take away their right to life and all these other
issues and costs are meaningless. What’s the significance of a healthy and growing economy to all those babies who are and were been killed before they are born?
Recently the Young Women’s Christian Association of
Nigeria (YWCA) sent a very confusing abortion message in a documentary they
presented on behalf of the United Nations. The message talks about “unsafe abortion”. The UN continues to inflict the
deadly and immoral consequences of this deceptive language: there is no such
thing as a safe abortion; every abortion is done to intentionally kill the
baby. The language is meant to deceive us into falsely thinking that women have
a “choice” and that abortion can be safe. Both statements are lies.
Lies about the environment
Recently the issue of extracting oil from the
Alberta oil sands without polluting environment has made the news. Canada in
order to sell the oil needs to show the world that the oil production doesn’t
harm the environment. These concerns are reason the Keystone pipeline to bring
oil from Canada into the United States was cancelled by the Obama government.
However, the same government has now embraced hydraulic-fracturing or
“fracking” to access natural gas reserves and sided with the oil and
gas industry. The dangers of a pipeline are readily visible to everyone. However,
what happens underground cannot be seen by the naked eye and so it becomes
easier to approve fracking, but it may be just as toxic to the environment and to people.
“Fracking” is a process where undisclosed
chemicals are pumped into underground rock and land to release the gas. This is the part the public is too often not told about. The
worry is that this procedure can contaminate the groundwater and release of
more greenhouse gases. This involves Canadian and American companies like
EnCana, ConocoPhillips and Chesapeake Energy. We do this language distortion in the name of
good capitalism and the making of profits, but we lose our moral ground.
The doublespeak on human sexuality

Today one of the ways in which we idolize the
body is in the name of individual freedom and sexual gratification. The code
expression “adult entertainment” is used to rationalize almost any
kind of sexual pleasure. As a result, we hardly raise an eyebrow anymore as
sins are committed against the virtue of chastity: lust, fornication, adult and
child pornography and prostitution. Persons are even sold and bought for sexual
pleasure. When people are bought like merchandise, it is always immoral and a grave sin against the human dignity of the person who is created
in the image of God. This kind of behavior is another societal indication of just how much the words we use to describe sexual freedom are disconnected to truth.


Language gives us a window to the truth. But if that window is dirty or opaque we cannot see though it clearly. Words are important in so far as they allow us to effectively move, know and hold information, but in themselves they have little or no value. Accurate communication and moral discourse rest on the respectful and careful use of words. Even our own thoughts can too easily be distorted: “We don’t lie. We merely prevaricate.” Just think of how impoverished our thoughts and lives would be without the words of the Bible, a nation’s constitution, the Catechism, a statement of human rights and all the great literature. Let’s consider, as an example, the parable of the Good Samaritan. The words in that story have the potential to reshape the true meaning of human relationships, of freedom and of love.

Once our language is falsified, then our behavior
will soon reflect this kind of thinking. For it’s hard to think, perhaps impossible, without
using language. And so how can anyone commit adultery when the language about
the act and the behavior are no longer telling that truth? When “Sexual freedom” makes no reference to the responsibility that
women and men have to chastity, to love and to marriage, it’s built on deception.
When there’s no “sin” in word, then for many there’s no sin in deed,
no immorality and no right or wrong. It was Blessed John Paul II who throughout his entire pontificate made the truth about human sexuality a cornerstone of his vocation. Two excellent places to find that truth is in the Theology of the Body and Love and Responsibility.

We will conclude with the words of St. Paul who told a Christian master
to relate to his Christian slave, “no longer as a slave but more then a
slave a beloved brother,… both in the flesh and in the Lord.” Change the
language to tell the truth and it changes everything. The Gospel is the language of love and truth; the truth that can set us free.

See more here:

The hijacking of language and moral discourse

Read More

Must Win(?)

Wednesday, March 14, 2012

Trying to post a little doodle of my nephew done today, on Spring Break from this (new to me) free Android smartphone app. I have no idea how the formatting will look once published to the blog or in the RSS Feed.

So, nothing profound I guess but wait.


On second thought maybe there is a profundity here. Do we approach Lent the way we do a game?

Are we trying to win God’s favour? Of course we

shouldn’t

be doing that and that

i

s something non Catholic Christians often accuse us of doing. And, in fairness, sometimes the language we use to describe our spiritual growth as Catholic Christians does add to the misconceptions held by other Christians about the Faith.

I know part of the point of Lent is loosing our life and gaining Christ but just the same, do we sometimes treat this Christian life like a competition we must win even if only against ourselves?

I welcome your comments.

Credit: 

Must Win(?)

Read More

Spiritual Dilemna

Wednesday, March 14, 2012

The reason I haven’t been posting lately is because of my ongoing spiritual angst with the pastor of my church. As parish secretary here, I am privy to plenty of complaints and other insights that are privileged knowledge and not to be shared, and my position also prevents me from speaking out. I always encourage people to either talk to the priest, or to write a letter to the Bishop. They aren’t inclined to do either, as it’s much easier to do nothing; also there is a history in this parish of another priest, from the same country and of the same disposition as this one, who had this parish so riled up that they ousted him. So with this one, people are not standing up to him, and are , instead, staying away from church, and also withholding funds. Our attendance at Mass has dropped dramatically, and we aren’t covering our monthly expenses. Something has to give. My dilemna is, do I write the Bishop? I can’t talk to this priest. He doesn’t listen to me, he brushes off every thing I say or suggest. I’m at the point where I am so upset that I don’t go to weekday Masses any more, and barely make it through Sunday Mass. If my husband wasn’t in the choir, I probably would go to another church, there is one a half hour away.

I have tried to see my way through this by prayer, and the help of the Communion of Saints. Talking to my husband the other day, he suggested that I call to mind well before Mass, all the good things about Mass, put my mind in a good place so that even physically I won’t be tense and tied up in knots like I usually am. I have lost the sense of holiness and the Sacred at Mass, and it is a severe trial to me- I so long for the joy that I get at Mass when there is a holy priest who truly loves God and radiates that love during the Holy Sacrifice. I am sure this is a cross given to me for my salvation, but oh what a struggle it is when it is my nature to just bolt and run to another church!

Please, pray for me and our parish.

Credit:  

Spiritual Dilemna

Read More

Ephesians 5

Wednesday, March 14, 2012

Original source:

Ephesians 5

Read More

MCI shares charter at UN conference

Wednesday, March 14, 2012

Rural women are often the caregivers in the family and the broader community. The negative consequences of neglected children, born and unborn, and the family–the natural and fundamental group unit of society (cf., Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 16, 3)–are far reaching. Improving the lives of rural women will therefore assist their families, the community and society as a whole.

Madame Chair,

Poverty and hunger are brought about to a large degree by unfair social and political systems that perpetuate inequality, where women are deprived of legal rights and a voice in decisions that affect them.

Education and training, the provision of resources, service delivery, access to financial systems and communication technology are just some areas which demand ongoing attention as they lead to realization of the right to development (cf., Declaration on the Right to Development, Article 8, 1).

The cooperation and involvement of men, especially in the form of joint initiatives by both men and women to overcome prejudice and implement policies, is crucial to an authentic human-centered approach, one which respects fully the inherent dignity of the human person, an essential component to prevailing over the challenges faced by rural women and indeed all women.

Madame Chair,

My delegation welcomes ongoing reflection on the essential role of women in society. Women, and in particular rural women, should be given the recognition that is due to them and they should be able to make an impact on the world around them.

The present session of the CSW provides an opportunity for experiences to be shared and best practices to be developed. Full respect must be accorded to the dignity of women, which is grounded in the very nature of being human and from which flow both rights and responsibilities.

See original article here - 

MCI shares charter at UN conference

Read More

The Judas Prophecy

Wednesday, March 14, 2012
Thumbnail

 

WHY did Judas commit suicide? That is, why did he not reap his sin of betrayal in another form, such as being beaten and robbed of his silver by thieves or being slain on the roadside by a mob of Roman soldiers? Instead, the fruit of Judas’ sin was suicide. On the surface, it appears as if he was simply a man driven to despair. But there is something far deeper in his ungodly death that speaks to our day, serving, in fact, as a warning.

It is the Judas prophecy.

TWO PATHS

Both Judas and Peter betrayed Jesus in their own way. Both of them represent that ever-present spirit of rebellion within and without man, and an inclination toward sin we call concupiscence that is a fruit of our fallen nature. Both men sinned gravely bringing them to the point of either of two paths: the path of repentance or the path of despair. Both were tempted to the latter, but in the end, Peter humbled himself and chose the path of repentance, which is the path of mercy opened by Christ’s death and resurrection. On the other hand, Judas hardened his heart toward Him whom He knew to be Mercy itself, and in pride, followed the path that leads to utter despair: the path of self-destruction.

In these men, we see a reflection of our present world that itself has come to such a fork in the road—to choose either the path of life or the path of death. On the surface, it sounds like an obvious choice. But it’s obviously not, for—whether people realize it or not—the world is plunging toward its own demise, say the popes…

 

LIAR AND A MURDERER

No civilization in their right minds would ever choose to self-destruct. And yet, here we are in 2012 watching the Western world contracept itself out of existence, abort its future, vigorously debate the legalization of “mercy killing”, and impose these policies of “reproductive health care” upon the rest of the world (in exchange for receiving aid money). And yet, brothers and sisters, many in our Western culture view this as “progress” and a “right,” even though our populations are aging and—save for immigration—rapidly shrinking. We are virtually committing “suicide”. How can this be seen as a good? Easy. For those who wish to dominate, or for some pantheists, or those who hold humankind in contempt, a reduction in population, however it comes, is a welcome change.

The bottom line is that they are deceived.

Jesus described Satan in some very precise terms:

He was a murderer from the beginning… he is a liar and the father of lies. (John 8:44)

Satan lies and deceives so as to draw souls, and eventually societies, into his snare where they can then be destroyed, both spiritually and physically. He does so by making that which is an evil appear as a good. Satan said to Eve:

You certainly will not die! God knows well that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened and you will be like gods, who know good and evil. (Gen 3:4-5)

Satan suggests that it is not necessary to trust God—that one can design the future through one’s own intellectual prowess and “wisdom” apart from God. Like Adam and Eve, our generation is being tempted to “be like gods”, especially through technology. But technology that is unguided by a proper moral ethic is the forbidden fruit, especially when it is used to destroy or alter life from its original plan.

Given such a grave situation, we need now more than ever to have the courage to look the truth in the eye and to call things by their proper name, without yielding to convenient compromises or to the temptation of self-deception. In this regard, the reproach of the Prophet is extremely straightforward: “Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness” (Is 5:20). —POPE JOHN PAUL II, Evangelium Vitae, “The Gospel of Life”, n. 58

The Roman Empire was a flourishing, liberal society that through corruption and immorality caved in upon itself. Pope Benedict compared our times to that fallen empire, pointing toward a world that has lost its consensus on the most essential values such as the inviolable right to life of every human being and the unchangeable institution of marriage. 

Only if there is such a consensus on the essentials can constitutions and law function. This fundamental consensus derived from the Christian heritage is at risk… In reality, this makes reason blind to what is essential. To resist this eclipse of reason and to preserve its capacity for seeing the essential, for seeing God and man, for seeing what is good and what is true, is the common interest that must unite all people of good will. The very future of the world is at stake. —POPE BENEDICT XVI, Address to the Roman Curia, December 20th, 2010

There is a noose around the world’s neck…

 

VERY GOOD LIES

After 1500 years of Christianity, the Church’s influence, which had transformed nations throughout Europe and beyond, was beginning to wane. Internal corruption, abuse of political power, and schism had greatly weakened her credibility. And thus, Satan, that ancient serpent, saw an opportunity to apply his poison. He did so by sowing philosophical lies that began what is called, ironically, the “Enlightenment” period. Over the course of the next few centuries, a world-view developed that placed intellectuality and science above faith. During the Enlightenment, such philosophies arose as:

  • Deism: There is a God… but he left mankind to work out his own future and laws.

  • Scientism: proponents refuse to accept anything that cannot be observed, measured, or experimented upon.

  • Rationalism: the belief that the only truths we can know with certainty are gained through reason alone.

  • Materialism: the belief that the only reality is the material universe.

  • Evolutionism: the belief that the evolutionary chain can be completely explained by random biological processes, excluding the need for God or God as its cause.

  • Utilitarianism: the ideology that actions are justified if they are useful or a benefit for the majority.

  • Psychologism: the tendency to interpret events in subjective terms, or to exaggerate the relevance of psychological factors.

  • Atheism: the theory or belief that God does not exist.

Nearly everyone believed in the existence of God 400 years ago. But four centuries later today, in the wake of that great historical confrontation between these philosophies and the Gospel, the world is giving way to atheism and Marxism, which is atheism’s pragmatic application.

We are now standing in the face of the greatest historical confrontation humanity has gone through… We are now facing the final confrontation between the Church and the anti-Church, of the Gospel and the anti-Gospel. —Cardinal Karol Wojtyla (JOHN PAUL II), at the Eucharistic Congress, Philadelphia, PA; August 13, 1976

Faith and reason are seen as incompatible. The human person is taught, and thus perceived, as merely an evolutionary product along with all the other by-products of a random universe. And hence, man is increasingly viewed as having no more dignity than a whale or a tree, and even seen as an imposition upon creation itself. A person’s worth today no longer lies in the fact that he is created in God’s image, but is measured in how small his “carbon footprint” is. And thus, wrote Blessed John Paul II:

With tragic consequences, a long historical process is reaching a turning-point. The process which once led to discovering the idea of “human rights”—rights inherent in every person and prior to any Constitution and State legislation—is today marked by a surprising contradiction… the very right to life is being denied or trampled upon, especially at the more significant moments of existence: the moment of birth and the moment of death… This is what is happening also at the level of politics and government: the original and inalienable right to life is questioned or denied on the basis of a parliamentary vote or the will of one part of the people—even if it is the majority. This is the sinister result of a relativism which reigns unopposed: the “right” ceases to be such, because it is no longer firmly founded on the inviolable dignity of the person, but is made subject to the will of the stronger part. In this way democracy, contradicting its own principles, effectively moves towards a form of totalitarianism. —POPE JOHN PAUL II, Evangelium Vitae, “The Gospel of Life”, n. 18, 20

Thus, we have arrived at this period in time where the lies of Satan, speciously hidden beneath a twisted logic void of an authentic ethic, are being exposed for what they are: a gospel of death, a cultural philosophy that is in fact a gaping noose. Within just the past half century or so, we have created technological weapons capable of annihilating nations; we have entered into two world wars; we have legalized infanticide in the womb; we have polluted and raped creation causing an unknown number of illnesses; we have injected carcinogenic and harmful chemicals into our food, land, and water; we have played with the genetic building blocks of life as if they are toys; and now we are openly debating the elimination of the unhealthy, depressed, or aged through “mercy killing.” Wrote Madonna House foundress Catherine de Hueck Doherty to Thomas Merton: 

For some reason I think you are weary. I know I am frightened and weary too. For the face of the Prince of Darkness is becoming clearer and clearer to me. It seems he does not care any more to remain “the great anonymous one,” the “incognito,” the “everyone.” He seems to have come into his own and shows himself in all his tragic reality. So few believe in his existence that he does not need to hide himself anymore! —Compassionate Fire, The Letters of Thomas Merton and Catherine de Hueck Doherty, March 17th, 1962, Ave Maria Press (2009), p. 60.

 

THE HEART OF IT

The heart of this crisis is spiritual. It is an arrogance whereby the proud wish to dominate and control the weak.

This [culture of death] is actively fostered by powerful cultural, economic and political currents which encourage an idea of society excessively concerned with efficiency. Looking at the situation from this point of view, it is possible to speak in a certain sense of a war of the powerful against the weak: a life which would require greater acceptance, love and care is considered useless, or held to be an intolerable burden, and is therefore rejected in one way or another. A person who, because of illness, handicap or, more simply, just by existing, compromises the well-being or life-style of those who are more favoured, tends to be looked upon as an enemy to be resisted or eliminated. In this way a kind of “conspiracy against life” is unleashed. —POPE JOHN PAUL II, Evangelium Vitae, “The Gospel of Life”, n. 12

The conspiracy is ultimately, again, satanic, for it is drawing entire classes of people into the jaws of the Dragon.

This struggle parallels the apocalyptic combat described in [Rev 11:19 - 12:1-6]. Death battles against Life: a “culture of death” seeks to impose itself on our desire to live, and live to the full… Vast sectors of society are confused about what is right and what is wrong, and are at the mercy of those with the power to “create” opinion and impose it on others… In our own century, as in no other time in history, the culture of death has assumed a social and institutional form of legality to justify the most horrible crimes against humanity: genocide. “final solutions”, “ethnic cleansings” and the massive taking of lives of human beings even before they are born, or before they reach the natural point of death. The “dragon” (Rev 12:3), the “ruler of this world” (Jn 12:31) and the “father of lies” (Jn 8:44), relentlessly tries to eradicate from human hearts the sense of gratitude and respect for the original extraordinary and fundamental gift of God: human life itself. Today that struggle has become increasingly direct.  —POPE JOHN PAUL II, Cherry Creek State Park Homily, Denver, Colorado, 1993

For if we are just a product of evolution, why not help the process along? After all, the population is too large, so say the controlling powers of our day. Ted Turner, founder of CNN, once said the world’s population should be reduced to 500 million. Prince Phillip remarked that, if he were to be reincarnated, he would want to come back as a killer virus.

The Pharaoh of old, haunted by the presence and increase of the children of Israel, submitted them to every kind of oppression and ordered that every male child born of the Hebrew women was to be killed (cf. Ex 1:7-22). Today not a few of the powerful of the earth act in the same way. They too are haunted by the current demographic growth… Consequently, rather than wishing to face and solve these serious problems with respect for the dignity of individuals and families and for every person’s inviolable right to life, they prefer to promote and impose by whatever means a massive programme of birth control. —POPE JOHN PAUL II, Evangelium Vitae, “The Gospel of Life”, n. 16

This godless mentality, in fact, is the very deception that the Catechism ties to the activity of the Antichrist who comes to create a better world than the one God made. A world where creation is genetically modified—”improved” over what has existed for millennia and where man himself is able to break beyond the boundaries of his nature into a poly-sexual being free from the incumbrance of moral strictures and monotheistic faith.  It will be a false messianic hope to bring the world Back to Eden—but an Eden recreated in man’s own image:

The Antichrist’s deception already begins to take shape in the world every time the claim is made to realize within history that messianic hope which can only be realized beyond history through the eschatological judgment. —Catechism of the Catholic Church, n. 676

This will lead to the ultimate fulfillment of the Judas Prophecy: a world where its own value has been so diminished that it will unwittingly adopt the rationality of despair in the form of euthanasia, population reduction, and genocide for “the good of the planet”—a world that finds no way out but the “noose”, so to speak. This in itself will produce more division and war between those nations that resist the cultural zeitgeist.

…without the guidance of charity in truth, this global force could cause unprecedented damage and create new divisions within the human family… humanity runs new risks of enslavement and manipulation… —POPE BENEDICT XVI, Caritas in Veritate, n.33, 26

The new messianists, in seeking to transform mankind into a collective being disconnected from his Creator, will unknowingly bring about the destruction of the greater portion of mankind. They will unleash unprecedented horrors: famines, plagues, wars, and ultimately Divine Justice. In the beginning they will use coercion to further reduce population, and then if that fails they will use force. —Michael D. O’Brien, Globalization and the New World Order, March 17th, 2009

And thus, we see in Judas a prophetic symbol for our times: that the pursuit of a false kingdom, be it one’s own or a political edifice, leads to one’s own destruction. For St. Paul writes:

…in [Christ] all things hold together. (Col 1:17)

When God, who is love, is excluded from society, all things come apart.

Whoever wants to eliminate love is preparing to eliminate man as such. —POPE BENEDICT XVI, Encyclical Letter, Deus Caritas Est (God is Love), n. 28b

In his letter to Timothy, St. Paul wrote that “the love of money is the root of all evils.” The errant philosophies of the past are culminating today in an individualism whereby the culture promotes the ego and material gain, while discarding transcendent truths. This is leading, however, to a Great Vacuum that is being filled by despair and dysfunction. So it was with Judas who, facing the reality that he had exchanged the Messiah for a mere thirty pieces of silver, despaired. Rather than turning to Christ who is “rich in mercy,” Judas hanged himself.

For whoever wishes to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake will find it. What profit would there be for one to gain the whole world and forfeit his life? Or what can one give in exchange for his life? (Matt 16:25-26)

Is it a coincidence that as we embrace a “culture of death,” global suicide rates, particularly among youth, are rising, all the while as once Christian nations are rapidly abandoning the faith…?

 

LIGHT WILL CAST OUT THE DARKNESS

We cannot be deluded by a false hope, that somehow our world of comfort and convenience will continue as it is while these gross injustices prevail. Neither can we pretend that the direction  developed countries continue to take the rest of the world in is of little consequence. “The future of the world is at stake,” said the Holy Father.

However, the genuine hope is this: it is Christ—not Satan—who is King of the heavens and earth. Satan is a creature, not a god. How much more, then, is the Antichrist limited in power:

Even the demons are checked by good angels lest they harm as much as they would. In like manner, Antichrist will not do as much harm as he would wish. —St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, Part I, Q.113, Art. 4

Our Lady of Fatima, who warned that atheistic Marxism would spread throughout the world if Heaven’s call to repentance was not heeded, said:

…Russia will spread her errors throughout the world causing wars and persecutions of the Church. The good will be martyred; the Holy Father will have much to suffer; various nations will be annihilated. In the end, my Immaculate Heart will triumph. The Holy Father will consecrate Russia to me, and she shall be converted, and a period of peace will be granted to the world.—Message of Fatima, www.vatican.va

The Church needs to prepare for difficult times. John Paul II, who said we are now “facing the final confrontation,” added that this is a trial that “lies within the plans of divine providence.” God is in charge. Thus, He will even use the Antichrist as an instrument of purification toward a triumphant period of peace.

Men’s anger will serve to praise you; its survivors surround you in joy. (Psalm 76:11)

The following is a “word” that came to an American priest who wishes to remain anonymous. His spiritual director, once a friend of St. Pio and spiritual director of Blessed Mother Theresa, discerned this word before it came to me. It is a summary of the Judas Prophecy coming to fulfillment in our times—and likewise, the triumph of Peter who turned from despair to Jesus’ mercy, and thus became a rock.

Have you considered that in the days when My Hand brought the Israelites out of Egypt from slavery that the people who lived at the time were highly industrialized , yet not civilized enough to recognize the dignity of the human person? What has changed I ask you? You also live in a time which is highly industrialized and yet extremely un-civil toward one another. How is it possible that man has evolved so as to create for himself and yet become darker in intellect as to his worth? Yes, this is the question: “How is it possible that you can become better at using the gifts of intellect to unlock the secrets of science and yet grow darker in your minds with regard to the sanctity of the human person?”

The answer is simple! All who fail to acknowledge Jesus Christ as Lord over mankind and all creation, fail to understand what God has done in the Person of Jesus Christ. Those who acknowledge Jesus Christ see in themselves what they see in Him. Human flesh has been Divinized and Deified, therefore, each person in his flesh is “Mystery” because He who is “Mystery” has shared His Divinity because He shares in your humanity. Those who follow Him as their Shepherd recognize the “Voice of Truth” , and thus are being taught and drawn into “His Mystery”. The goats on the other hand belong to another who teaches the de-humanization of each person. He desires to debase humanity as the lowest form of creation and thus mankind turns in on himself. The glorification of animals and the worship of creation is only the beginning, for Satan’s plan is to convince mankind that he must rid the planet of himself in order to save it. Do not be shocked by this, nor should you be afraid… for I Am with you to prepare you in order that when the time comes you will be ready to lead My people out of the darkness and snare of Satan’s plan into My Light and Kingdom of Peace! —given on February 27th, 2012

 

Visit site:

The Judas Prophecy

Read More

Saint Goustan and the Fish

Wednesday, March 14, 2012
Thumbnail

Saint Gousan with his fish
(fish hidden for copyright reasons)

The story goes like this…

Goustan was born in Cornwall in 974 and was kidnapped by pirates when he was 18 years old. As they went on their piratical way Goustan hurt his foot. He was abandoned on the Island of Houat, near Vannes. His life was saved through God’s intervention with miraculous fish.

Hence the fish (actually probably a porpoise) with Saint Goustan.

Each day Goustan ate a part of the fish and kept the rest for the next day. Then miraculously each day the fish was made whole again.

Saint Goustan went on to found a monastery having been converted to the faith by Saint Felix. Now Saint Goustan is the patron saint of fisherman.

Original article:

Saint Goustan and the Fish

Read More

To have no other soul but Mary’s, living within you

Wednesday, March 14, 2012
Thumbnail


St. Louis-Marie de Montfort
characterizes his True Devotion to Jesus through Mary as being the total consecration
of all we are and all we have unto the blessed Virgin and unto Christ through her,
so that we might have no other spirit or soul or heart but Mary’s with which we
might know, glorify, and love God in time and in eternity.

But how can it be that Mary may
dwell in the human soul?


From
de Montfort: The Holy Spirit searches for Mary in the Christian soul
From the “True Devotion”:
36. When the Holy Spirit, her spouse, finds Mary in a soul,
he hastens there and enters fully into it. He gives himself generously to that
soul according to the place it has given to his spouse. One of the main reasons
why the Holy Spirit does not work striking wonders in souls is that he fails to
find in them a sufficiently close union with his faithful and inseparable
spouse. I say “inseparable spouse”, for from the moment the
substantial love of the Father and the Son espoused Mary to form Jesus, the head
of the elect, and Jesus in the elect, he has never disowned her, for she has
always been faithful and fruitful.
And again:
217. The soul of Mary will be communicated to you to glorify
the Lord. Her spirit will take the place of yours to rejoice in God, her
Saviour, but only if you are faithful to the practices of this devotion. As St.
Ambrose says, “May the soul of Mary be in each one of us to glorify the
Lord! May the spirit of Mary be in each one of us to rejoice in God!”
“When will that happy day come,” asks a saintly man of our own day
whose life was completely wrapped up in Mary, “when God’s Mother is
enthroned in men’s hearts as Queen, subjecting them to the dominion of her
great and princely Son? When will souls breathe Mary as the body breathes air?”
When that time comes wonderful things will happen on earth. The Holy Spirit,
finding his dear Spouse present again in souls, will come down into them with
great power. He will fill them with his gifts, especially wisdom, by which they
will produce wonders of grace. My dear friend, when will that happy time come,
that age of Mary, when many souls, chosen by Mary and given her by the most
High God, will hide themselves completely in the depths of her soul, becoming
living copies of her, loving and glorifying Jesus? That day will dawn only when
the devotion I teach is understood and put into practice. Ut adveniat regnum tuum, adveniat regnum Mariae: “Lord, that
your kingdom may come, may the reign of Mary come!”
The
prayer of St. Loius-Marie
Hail Mary, beloved Daughter of the Eternal Father. Hail Mary,
admirable Mother of the Son. Hail Mary, faithful Spouse of the Holy Ghost. Hail
Mary, my Mother, my loving Mistress, my powerful sovereign. Hail, my joy, my
glory, my heart and my soul. Thou art all mine by mercy, and I am thine by
justice. But I am not yet sufficiently thine. I now give myself wholly to thee
without keeping anything back for myself or others. If thou seest anything in
me which does not belong to thee, I beseech thee to take it and make thyself
the absolute Mistress of all that is mine.
Destroy in me all that may displease God; root it up and
bring it to nought. Place and cultivate in me everything that is pleasing to
thee. May the light of thy faith dispel the darkness of my mind. May thy
profound humility take the place of my pride; may thy sublime contemplation
check the distractions of my wandering imagination. May the continuous sight of
God fill my memory with His Presence; may the burning love of thy heart inflame
the lukewarmness of mine. May thy virtues take the place of my sins; may thy
merits be my only adornment in the sight of God and make up for all that is
wanting in me. Finally, dearly beloved Mother, grant, if it be possible, that I may
have no other spirit but thine to know Jesus, and His Divine Will; that I may
have no other soul but thine to praise and glorify God; that I may have no
other heart but thine to love God with a love as pure and ardent as thine.
I do not ask thee for visions, revelations, sensible
devotions, or spiritual pleasures. It is thy privilege to see God clearly, it
is thy privilege to enjoy heavenly bliss; it is thy privilege to triumph
gloriously in heaven at the right hand of thy Son and to hold absolute sway
over angels, men, and demons.
It is thy privilege to dispose of all the gifts of God, just
as thou willest. Such, O heavenly Mary, the ‘best part’, which the Lord has
given thee, and which shall never be taken away from thee–and this thought
fills my heart with joy. As for my part here below, I wish for no other than
that which was thine, to believe sincerely without spiritual pleasures, to
suffer joyfully without human consolation, to die continually to myself without
respite, and to work zealously and unselfishly for thee until death, as the
humblest of thy servants. The only grace I beg thee, for me, is that every
moment of the day, and every moment of my life, I may say, “Amen, so be
it, to all that thou art doing in heaven. Amen, so be it, to all thou didst do
while on earth. Amen, so be it, to all thou art doing in my soul,” so that
thou alone mayest fully glorify Jesus in me for time and eternity. Amen.
Can
Mary’s soul be substantially present in my soul?
There are several reasons why
Mary’s soul cannot be substantially present within another human soul. First,
if I no longer had my soul, but only Mary’s soul (substantially), then I would
cease to be myself and would become Mary. No, there is no substantial change
effected by the Total Consecration; and, surely, St. Louis de Montfort means to
imply no such thing.
And yet, de Montfort does imply
that there is a real sense in which Mary is present in the soul which is
totally consecrated to her. This is no mere metaphor or flowery speech –
devotion isn’t only a matter of words, after all.
In what real sense, then, can
we say that Mary is present in the whole which is wholly given over to her?
Moral
presence in a soul
It is clear, from context, that
St. Louis-Marie is speaking of what we may call a “moral presence”. When he
tells us that the Holy Spirit must find Mary living in a soul, de Montfort is
speaking of a soul which is wholly conformed to Mary through the perfect
imitation of her virtues, which are the virtues of Christ.
Thus, in his prayer (above),
St. Louis asks for Mary’s faith, humility and contemplation to replace his own
darkness, pride and distraction. Further, it is all summed-up in the following
words: “May thy virtues [O Mary] take the place of my sins.”
Through the perfect imitation
of Mary’s virtues, there is a real sense in which Mary is present in that soul –
and when the Christian has given over all his merit and satisfaction (together
with all his works) to Mary, holding nothing back, then there is no other
virtue or disposition or thought in the soul which is not in imitation of Mary
(through being wholly consecrated to her). Then, in a more perfect sense, we
may say that Mary lives in that soul, and that soul in Mary.

Link: 

To have no other soul but Mary’s, living within you

Read More

Saint Patrick and the Labyrinthine Ways

Wednesday, March 14, 2012
Thumbnail

New York Saint Patrick's Day Parade, Catholic League President Bill Donohue, religious rights and civil liberties, Saint Patrick of Ireland, Catholic priests falsely accused, Fr. Gordon MacRae, Rev. Gordon MacRae, These Stone Walls, Saint Patrick, Catholic League, Irish Catholics, justice for priests, Fr. Michael Orsi, Catalyst

The New York City Saint Patrick’s Day Parade is world famous. Every year on Saint Patrick’s Day, Catholic league President Bill Donohue leads a contingent of CL members down Fifth Avenue bearing the Catholic League’s banner. It is far more than a statement of honor for the Shepherd of Ireland. The Catholic League’s presence in that parade is a declaration of the struggle for religious rights and civ1l liberties. It was a hard won struggle, not only for Irish Catholics but for all Catholics throughout America.

It was a victory that is often placed in jeopardy, as it is now. The rights to practice the tenets of faith and maintain Catholic ideals are constantly eroding in our increasingly secular culture. The Catholic League is always on that front line. As I wrote in my March 17, 2010 post on These Stone Walls:

“If you’re not a Catholic League member, I highly recommend becoming one. A monthly subscription to Catalyst certainly woke me up to the reality of anti-Catholic prejudice in our culture, and to a growing effort to remove a Catholic voice and Catholic influence and values from the public square.”

I didn’t think those words were actually prophetic, but if you’ve been reading newspapers in the last few months, or hanging out at Catholic blogs, then you know first hand how very much Catholic values are under assault – and not, if you know history, for the first or last time.

In many ways, I see my own struggle for justice as linked to that of all Catholics. I am often asked whether I would be in prison today if I were not a Catholic priest. Readers often point out to me that the standard of justice applied to accused priests is far different than that applied to everyone else.

And as I once wrote in “The Mirror of Justice Cracked,” justice for priests has eroded not just for the Church, but in the Church as well. As I have seen so many other priests exiled under the millstone of scandal – accusations so old that the priests accused are left defenseless – I have to repeat a thought from my Ash Wednesday post, “A City on a Hill“: “A part of our sacrifice as a Church must not be to sacrifice justice for priests falsely accused.”

In the March, 2010 issue of the Catholic League’s monthly journal, Catalyst, These Stone Walls and I shared the spotlight w1th plans for that year’s Saint Patrick’s Day Parade. That issue of Catalyst had an editorial entitled “These Stone Walls” in which the Catholic League recommended TSW to its readers and members. I was very moved, as were many of TSW’s readers.

I don’t think it is by design – at least not human design – but I am also sharing the March 2012 Catalyst with Saint Patrick. The current issue has a superb article by Father Michael Orsi, Ed.D., an author and professor of law at Ave Maria University, entitled “Bogus Charges Against Priests Abound.” The article is primarily an extended review of David F. Pierre’s book: Catholic Priests Falsely Accused. Both the book and the Father Orsi article contain an analysis of the case against me. Father Orsi introduced this segment thusly:

“A sure way to ameliorate the injustices perpetrated against priests and to rehabilitate the reputation of the Church would be to re-examine the cases of those priests found guilty due to false or dubious claims filed against them. The widely reported case of Fr. Gordon MacRae, of the Diocese of Manchester, New Hampshire, would be a good place to start.” (Fr. Michael Orsi, Catalyst, March 2012).

Some people would be honored to be included in such an article, and I am, but at the end of the day “humbled” wins out. I find it humbling because the struggle I am in is not my own. It is rather a small, small part in the immense fabric of grace woven by God, and as I wrote in “The Gravity of Grace” last week, grace calls us to build trust in God’s plan not just for us as individual souls, but as a Church in the modern world.

The story of St. Patrick of Ireland is a perfect example of the gravity of grace. We tend to reduce Saint Patrick to the whimsical Shepherd of Ireland who inspires our parades (and maybe a snort or two of Jameson’s) this week, but the life of the real Saint Patrick is one of terrible tragedy responded to with the courage born of sanctifying grace.

Stepping for a moment into the life and lore of Saint Patrick of Ireland will help us see more clearly these labyrinthine ways of grace. Whether you’re Irish or not – and whether you’re Catholic or not – the story of Saint Patrick is one of profound struggle against the forces of human evil, tragedy, and salvation against the tides of human history.

So please join us this week for an encore presentation of my favorite Saint Patrick’s Day post. It’s worth the effort even if only for the beautiful Irish graphics from TSW’s Managing Editor, Suzanne. And for another brief review of one of my favorite books, Pillars of the Earth.

Click here to read: “The Catholic League, Saint Patrick,
 and the Labyrinthine Ways”

Editor’s Note: Several of you have expressed a desire to join Fr. MacRae in a Spiritual Communion. He celebrates a private Mass in his prison cell on Sunday evenings between 11 pm and midnight. You’re invited to join in a Holy Hour during that time if you’re able.

Subscribe to Fr. Gordon MacRae’s Posts

Please share this post

  • Facebook
  • E-mail this story to a friend!

Related posts

Medical Update

Wednesday, March 14, 2012

My friends, I am sorry that I never posted an update after my last appointment in Baltimore on March 1st. Everything went well, and the MRI scans showed that the tumor is stable, and perhaps slightly smaller (the change is so slight that it’s hard to tell if a change actually occurred). Overall, good news.

Since returning home from the seminary, my blood counts have also gotten better, and I am no longer “immuno-deficient.”

I have chosen to remain on the daily low-dose chemotherapy. I don’t have many side effects from it and it seems to be doing the trick, so why not! There is some concern about long-term effects of chemotherapy (causing secondary cancers due to long-term exposure), so I’ll probably stop taking it around September or October. At that time, I’ll have MRIs every few weeks to monitor the tumor. If it starts to grow again, I can begin the chemo again with no problem.

So for now, please keep praying for me. My MRIs have been extended to 3 months between appointments because I have been stable for so long and changes aren’t expected. I should go back for another MRI at the end of May/beginning of June.

Thanks for your prayers!

Continued:

Medical Update

Read More

What’s it all about Alfie?

Wednesday, March 14, 2012

Is it just for the moment we live?

The whole HHS deal going on here in America is not about women having access to birth control, though the media spin would have those do not dig a bit believe it so.

The best take I have read on it comes from the Testimony of ;Most Reverend William E. Lori Bishop of Bridgeport, On behalf of the ;United States Conference of Catholic Bishops
Before the ;Committee on Oversight and Government Reform United States House of Representatives
On February 16, 2012.

Bishop Lori is both a bishop and the spiritual leader, Supreme Chaplain of the Knights of Columbus. He is a gentle man, a prudent and holy one as well. As a shepherd he is not above using a parable to get his point across, much like the originator of our faith, Jesus Christ. This s his concise testimony.

For my testimony today, I would like to tell a story. Let’s call it, “The Parable of the Kosher Deli.”

Once upon a time, a new law is proposed, so that any business that serves food must serve pork. There is a narrow exception for kosher catering halls attached to synagogues, since they serve mostly members of that synagogue, but kosher delicatessens are still subject to the mandate.

The Orthodox Jewish community—whose members run kosher delis and many other restaurants and grocers besides—expresses its outrage at the new government mandate. And they are joined by others who have no problem eating pork—not just the many Jews who eat pork, but people of all faiths—because these others recognize the threat to the principle of religious liberty. They recognize as well the practical impact of the damage to that principle. They know that, if the mandate stands, they might be the next ones forced—under threat of severe government sanction—to violate their most deeply held beliefs, especially their unpopular beliefs.

Meanwhile, those who support the mandate respond, “But pork is good for you. It is, after ;
all, the other white meat.” Other supporters add, “So many Jews eat pork, and those who don’t should just get with the times.” Still others say, “Those Orthodox are just trying to impose their beliefs on everyone else.”

But in our hypothetical, those arguments fail in the public debate, because people widely recognize the following.

First, although people may reasonably debate whether pork is good for you,
that’s not the question posed by the nationwide pork mandate. Instead, the mandate generates the question whether people who believe—even if they believe in error—that pork is not good for you, should be forced by government to serve pork within their very own institutions. In a nation committed to religious liberty and diversity, the answer, of course, is no.

Second, the fact that some (or even most) Jews eat pork is simply irrelevant. The fact remains that some Jews do not—and they do not out of their most deeply held religious convictions. Does the fact that large majorities in society—even large majorities within the protesting religious community—reject a particular religious belief make it permissible for the government to weigh in on one side of that dispute? Does it allow government to punish that minority belief with its coercive power? In a nation committed to religious liberty and diversity, the answer, of course, is no.

Third, the charge that the Orthodox Jews are imposing their beliefs on others has it exactly backwards. Again, the question generated by a government mandate is whether the government will impose its belief that eating pork is good on objecting Orthodox Jews. Meanwhile, there is no imposition at all on the freedom of those who want to eat pork. That is, they are subject to no government interference at all in their choice to eat pork, and pork is ubiquitous and cheap, available at the overwhelming majority of restaurants and grocers. Indeed, some pork producers and retailers, and even the government itself, are so eager to promote the eating of pork, that they sometimes give pork away for free.

In this context, the question is this: can a customer come to a kosher deli, demand to be served a ham sandwich, and if refused, bring down severe government sanction on the deli. In a nation committed to religious liberty and diversity, the answer, of course, is no.
So in our hypothetical story, because the hypothetical nation is indeed committed to religious liberty and diversity, these arguments carry the day.

In response, those proposing the new law claim to hear and understand the concerns of kosher deli owners, and offer them a new “accommodation.” You are free to call yourself a kosher deli; you are free not to place ham sandwiches on your menu; you are free not to be the person to prepare the sandwich and hand it over the counter to the customer. But we will force your meat supplier to set up a kiosk on your premises, and to offer, prepare, and serve ham sandwiches to all of your customers, free of charge to them. And when you get your monthly bill from your meat supplier, it will include the cost of any of the “free” ham sandwiches that your customers may accept. And you will, of course, be required to pay that bill.

Some who supported the deli owners initially began to celebrate the fact that ham sandwiches didn’t need to be on the menu, and didn’t need to be prepared or served by the deli itself. But on closer examination, they noticed three troubling things. First, all kosher delis will still be forced to pay for the ham sandwiches. Second, many of the kosher delis’ meat suppliers, themselves, are forbidden in conscience from offering, preparing, or serving pork to anyone. Third, there are many kosher delis that are their own meat supplier, so the mandate to offer, prepare, and serve the ham sandwich still falls on them.
This story has a happy ending. The government recognized that it is absurd for someone to come into a kosher deli and demand a ham sandwich; that it is beyond absurd for that private demand to be backed with the coercive power of the state; that it is downright surreal to apply this coercive power when the customer can get the same sandwich cheaply, or even free, just a few doors down.

The question before the United States government—right now—is whether the story of our own Church institutions that serve the public, and that are threatened by the HHS mandate, will end happily too. Will our nation continue to be one committed to religious liberty and diversity? We urge, in the strongest possible terms, that the answer must be yes. We urge you, in the strongest possible terms, to answer the same way.
Thank you for your attention.

Read More - 

What’s it all about Alfie?

Read More

  • What did I miss ???

  • sample
  • sample

  • CC Archives

  • sample
  • facebook twitter youtube
  • sample
  • sample