By Joshua Rhett Miller
(Fox News) A Harvard student group’s planned satanic “black mass” has been canceled after widespread condemnation from religious and educational leaders, who called the event an affront to the faithful.
MyFoxBoston.com reports that The Harvard Extension Cultural Studies Club announced Monday it would no longer hold the event because negotiations broke down between the group and the bar where it was scheduled to be held. The club was unable to find another location to hold the mass.
The group said that the New York-based Satanic Temple, which had co-organized the event, planned to still hold the mass in an undisclosed, private location to "reaffirm their respect for the Satanic faith and to demonstrate that the most powerful response to offensive speech is to shame those who marginalize others by letting their own words and actions speak for themselves."
The ceremony has traditionally been performed by satanic cults to parody the Catholic church, and officials at the Archdiocese of Boston were furious that such an event was originally scheduled to be held on the Ivy League school's hallowed grounds.
“I would say that the event is an attack on the Eucharist, regardless of what the organizers state,” archdiocese spokesman Terry Donilon told FoxNews.com in an email. “The event is offensive to Catholics and people of good will.”
The archdiocese called last week for the event to be canceled.
“For the good of the Catholic faithful and all people, the church provides clear teaching concerning satanic worship,” the archdiocese said in a statement. “This activity separates people from God and the human community, it is contrary to charity and goodness, and it places the participants dangerously close to destructive works of evil.”
Robert Neugeboren, dean of students and alumni affairs at Harvard Extension School, said the “deeply disturbing” event is offensive to many at Harvard and called for it to be canceled.
“While we support the ability of all our students to explore difficult issues, we also encourage them to do so in ways that are sensitive to others,” Neugeboren said in a statement. “To that end, the Harvard Extension School has worked with the club’s student leaders to address specific concerns that have been expressed.”
Archdiocese officials had scheduled at least two events in response to the black mass, including a Eucharistic procession in Cambridge. It was unclear whether those events would proceed.
"The best way to combat hateful speech is to overwhelm it with loving and prayerful speech, and that is what we intend to do," Rev. Luther Zeigler, president of the Harvard Chaplains, wrote FoxNews.com in an email.
The student club, meanwhile, said in a statement that the performance’s purpose was not to denigrate any religion or faith, but instead to “learn and experience” the history of different cultural practices.
In a statement to the Harvard Crimson, the university’s student newspaper, the cultural club said the event would not silence anyone.
“The complaints are founded metaphysical concerns, and there is simply a disagreement with regards to how this faith is practiced,” club organizers wrote The Harvard Crimson. “The flawed assumption seems to be that because Satan is the representation of evil incarnate for some faiths, that Satanist[s] are part of a hate group and their practice devoted toward denigrating Catholicism … The point of this event is to challenge the stigmatization of marginalized groups.”
Nearly 400 Harvard students and 100 alumni reportedly signed a petition opposing the event.
“This form of satanic worship not only ridicules the central practice of Catholicism, the Mass, but it also mocks and offends all who have faith in Christ,” the petition reads. “Far from being an event that promotes an understanding of “cultural practices,” it, in fact, promotes contempt for the Catholic faith and religion generally. We are Catholics, other Christians, and supporters of genuine tolerance and civility, and we are offended and outraged this event has been permitted to take place at Harvard.”
Harvard President Drew Faust, in a statement released Monday, said it would be “deeply regrettable” if the event’s organizer proceeded despite the fervent opposition by some local residents and students.
“Nevertheless, consistent with the university’s commitment to free expression, including expression that may deeply offend us, the decision to proceed is and will remain theirs,” Faust said. “At the same time, we will vigorously protect the right of others to respond — and to address offensive expression with expression of their own.”
Link:
Showing posts with label anti-Catholic. Show all posts
Showing posts with label anti-Catholic. Show all posts
Monday, May 12, 2014
Tuesday, March 18, 2014
Boycott Guinness, Sam Adams, Heineken - Catholic League
By Bill Donohue
(The Catholic League) Bill Donohue is calling for a boycott of Guinness, Heineken, and Sam Adams:
Diageo, the parent company of Guinness, and Heineken, have pulled their sponsorship of New York’s St. Patrick’s Day parade; the Boston Beer Company, maker of Sam Adams, has withdrawn its sponsorship of Boston’s St. Patrick’s Day parade.
None of these companies believe in diversity. No gay person has ever been barred from marching in any St. Patrick’s Day parade, anymore than the parade bans pro-life Catholics or vegetarian Catholics; they simply cannot march under their own banner. The parade has one cause: honoring St. Patrick. Those who disagree do not have to march—that’s what diversity is all about.
The parade is quintessentially Catholic, beginning with a Mass in St. Patrick’s Cathedral. It is this Catholic element that angers those who are engaged in a bullying campaign against the St. Patrick’s Day parades. The bullies also have nothing but contempt for the constitutional rights of Irish Catholics.
In 1995, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in a 9-0 decision that the First Amendment guarantees the right of private parade organizers to determine its own rules for marching. It is this liberty that the makers of Guinness, Heineken, and Sam Adams want to squash.
I have had my last Guinness and Sam Adams. Heineken was always slop, so there is no sacrifice there. I urge Catholics, and all those who believe in tolerance, diversity, and the First Amendment, to join with me in boycotting these brews.
To contact Guinness, email: press.office@diageo.com
To contact Heineken, email: pressoffice@heineken.com
To contact Sam Adams, email: jessica.paar@bostonbeer.com
Link:
Related:
(The Catholic League) Bill Donohue is calling for a boycott of Guinness, Heineken, and Sam Adams:
Diageo, the parent company of Guinness, and Heineken, have pulled their sponsorship of New York’s St. Patrick’s Day parade; the Boston Beer Company, maker of Sam Adams, has withdrawn its sponsorship of Boston’s St. Patrick’s Day parade.
None of these companies believe in diversity. No gay person has ever been barred from marching in any St. Patrick’s Day parade, anymore than the parade bans pro-life Catholics or vegetarian Catholics; they simply cannot march under their own banner. The parade has one cause: honoring St. Patrick. Those who disagree do not have to march—that’s what diversity is all about.
The parade is quintessentially Catholic, beginning with a Mass in St. Patrick’s Cathedral. It is this Catholic element that angers those who are engaged in a bullying campaign against the St. Patrick’s Day parades. The bullies also have nothing but contempt for the constitutional rights of Irish Catholics.
In 1995, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in a 9-0 decision that the First Amendment guarantees the right of private parade organizers to determine its own rules for marching. It is this liberty that the makers of Guinness, Heineken, and Sam Adams want to squash.
I have had my last Guinness and Sam Adams. Heineken was always slop, so there is no sacrifice there. I urge Catholics, and all those who believe in tolerance, diversity, and the First Amendment, to join with me in boycotting these brews.
To contact Guinness, email: press.office@diageo.com
To contact Heineken, email: pressoffice@heineken.com
To contact Sam Adams, email: jessica.paar@bostonbeer.com
Link:
Related:
Thursday, May 9, 2013
Bill Donohue - David Bowie's "Jesus" Video is a Mess
Bill Donohue comments on David Bowie’s video that accompanies his song, “The Next Day”:
(Catholic League) David Bowie is back, but hopefully not
for long. The switch-hitting, bisexual, senior citizen from London has
resurfaced, this time playing a Jesus-like character who hangs out in a
nightclub dump frequented by priests, cardinals and half-naked women.
The video is strewn with characteristic excess: one priest bashes a homeless man, while others are busy hitting on women; self-flagellation is depicted; a dancing gal with bleeding hands makes a stigmata statement; and a customer is served eyeballs on a plate. The lyrics refer to the “priest stiff in hate” and “women dressed as men for the pleasure of that priest.” The song concludes with, “They can work with Satan while they dress with the saints.” In short, the video reflects the artist—it is a mess.
Bowie is nothing if not confused about religion. He once made a public confession: “I was young, fancy free, and Tibetan Buddhism appealed to me at that time. I thought, ‘There’s salvation.’ It didn’t really work. Then I went through Nietzsche, Satanism, Christianity…pottery, and ended up singing. It’s been a long road.” Too bad the pottery didn’t work.
But Bowie didn’t give up trying to figure out who he is. “I’m not quite an atheist and it worries me. There’s a little bit that holds on. Well, I’m almost an atheist. Give me a couple of months.”
Well, Bowie has had more than a couple of months—it’s been ten years since he spoke those words. Not sure what he believes in today (anyone who is “not quite an atheist” is not an atheist), but it’s a sure bet he can’t stop thinking about the Cadillac of all religions, namely Roman Catholicism. There is hope for him yet. Link:
Related:
The video is strewn with characteristic excess: one priest bashes a homeless man, while others are busy hitting on women; self-flagellation is depicted; a dancing gal with bleeding hands makes a stigmata statement; and a customer is served eyeballs on a plate. The lyrics refer to the “priest stiff in hate” and “women dressed as men for the pleasure of that priest.” The song concludes with, “They can work with Satan while they dress with the saints.” In short, the video reflects the artist—it is a mess.
Bowie is nothing if not confused about religion. He once made a public confession: “I was young, fancy free, and Tibetan Buddhism appealed to me at that time. I thought, ‘There’s salvation.’ It didn’t really work. Then I went through Nietzsche, Satanism, Christianity…pottery, and ended up singing. It’s been a long road.” Too bad the pottery didn’t work.
But Bowie didn’t give up trying to figure out who he is. “I’m not quite an atheist and it worries me. There’s a little bit that holds on. Well, I’m almost an atheist. Give me a couple of months.”
Well, Bowie has had more than a couple of months—it’s been ten years since he spoke those words. Not sure what he believes in today (anyone who is “not quite an atheist” is not an atheist), but it’s a sure bet he can’t stop thinking about the Cadillac of all religions, namely Roman Catholicism. There is hope for him yet. Link:
Related:
Wednesday, April 24, 2013
Femen feminists attack Archbishop Andre-Joseph Leonard of Mechelen-Brussels, Belgium
"Scantily clad activists of feminist group Femen invaded a conference at a university in Brussels. During the act, demonstrators threw water on the Archbishop of Mechelen-Brussels, Andre-Joseph Leonard. The priest did not react and avoided looking at the activists. The protest was against homophobia, according to international agencies. At the end of the demonstration, the archbishop kissed a picture of the Virgin Mary to leave the room. Born in Ukraine and with subsidiaries in several countries (including Brazil and nations with a Muslim majority), the Femen often campaigning for the rights of women and minorities. One of their banners is the defense of gay marriage."
BRUSSELS (AFP) - The Catholic Church in Belgium on Wednesday angrily denounced Femen topless protesters who targeted its primate at a conference though the archbishop himself remained composed and apparently at prayer throughout.
The four protesters leapt out of their seats at a debate on blasphemy and freedom of expression held at the Brussels' Free University (ULB) campus Tuesday evening, baring their breasts and squirting water at Archbishop Andre Leonard as they accused him of homophobia.
Security guards threw the women out of the hall within minutes as the archbishop remained quietly seated, his hands crossed apparently in prayer.
The Belgian religious leader, a known conservative, has often been criticised for his stand on gay issues.
In March he said homosexuals should practise "a form of celibacy and abstinence" and welcomed protests in France against its gay marriage legislation.
The Church in a statement denounced "the attitude of a few persons... in total contradiction with the theme of the debate and with the manner in which the Catholic Church hopes for dialogue".
"At the end of the demonstration, the archbishop kissed a picture of the Virgin Mary to leave the room."
Link to AFP story
Sunday, March 10, 2013
Widow sues church over refusal to install late husband's NASCAR-inspired headstone
(AP) NORTH VERNON, Ind. – An Indiana woman who wanted
to honor her late husband with a headstone that captured his interests in sports
and the outdoors is suing a Catholic church for refusing to install it.
Shannon Carr spent $9,600 on the black granite headstone to mark the grave of her husband, Jason Carr, who died in an August 2009 automobile accident. The headstone is shaped like a couch and features images of a deer, a dog and color logos of NASCAR and the Indianapolis Colts.
The Rev. Jonathan Meyer, priest at St. Joseph Catholic Church, notified the monument maker that the headstone didn't meet the cemetery's standards and couldn't be placed in the church's century-old graveyard, The Republic
reported.
But Carr says in her lawsuit that the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Indianapolis
Properties Inc., which owns the cemetery, never produced any regulations for the
plot until more than a year after she tried to have the headstone installed in
2010.
The issue has divided the church community and sparked allegations that the church hasn't treated Carr's family with compassion, which Meyer denied.
"We provided the family funeral rites, prepared a funeral meal and offered family members individual counseling after the services," Meyer said. "We were with them the entire way until this matter came up."
Meyer says in an affidavit that photographs of the monument were shown to the St. Joseph Parish Council six weeks before Carr purchased it and that the council determined the monument wasn't acceptable because of its secular nature. He said he informed Carr of the decision.
"They told her not to move forward with the purchasing of the monument, but she went ahead anyway," Meyer said. "We have consistently communicated the same message prior to the purchase and after the purchase. We did not think a granite couch was an appropriate monument in our historic cemetery."
Meyer acknowledged that the rules for the cemetery were formalized after Carr bought the headstone, but he said they were known before that. The archdiocese says various regulations regarding the cemetery have existed since the graveyard was established in 1907.
Archdiocese attorney John S. Mercer says in court documents that the lawsuit falls outside the court's jurisdiction because the First Amendment prohibits courts from taking indirect control over Church affairs.
Meyer said the pressure on the church to allow the monument to be erected reflects a flaw in today's society.
"Our culture breaks all the rules to make people feel good," Meyer said. "Faithful Christians know rules and regulations are set up so there can be good for everyone."
Shannon Carr declined to discuss the case, but her father-in-law, Henry Carr, said the dispute has created bitterness within the church community.
"I haven't been back to (St. Joseph) church and have asked that I not be buried there along with my son," he said. "I'm told the controversy is splitting the church apart, tearing it in half. But I guess that's what has to be done."
Link:
Shannon Carr spent $9,600 on the black granite headstone to mark the grave of her husband, Jason Carr, who died in an August 2009 automobile accident. The headstone is shaped like a couch and features images of a deer, a dog and color logos of NASCAR and the Indianapolis Colts.
The Rev. Jonathan Meyer, priest at St. Joseph Catholic Church, notified the monument maker that the headstone didn't meet the cemetery's standards and couldn't be placed in the church's century-old graveyard, The Republic
reported.
But Carr says in her lawsuit that the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Indianapolis
Properties Inc., which owns the cemetery, never produced any regulations for the
plot until more than a year after she tried to have the headstone installed in
2010.The issue has divided the church community and sparked allegations that the church hasn't treated Carr's family with compassion, which Meyer denied.
"We provided the family funeral rites, prepared a funeral meal and offered family members individual counseling after the services," Meyer said. "We were with them the entire way until this matter came up."
Meyer says in an affidavit that photographs of the monument were shown to the St. Joseph Parish Council six weeks before Carr purchased it and that the council determined the monument wasn't acceptable because of its secular nature. He said he informed Carr of the decision.
"They told her not to move forward with the purchasing of the monument, but she went ahead anyway," Meyer said. "We have consistently communicated the same message prior to the purchase and after the purchase. We did not think a granite couch was an appropriate monument in our historic cemetery."
Meyer acknowledged that the rules for the cemetery were formalized after Carr bought the headstone, but he said they were known before that. The archdiocese says various regulations regarding the cemetery have existed since the graveyard was established in 1907.
Archdiocese attorney John S. Mercer says in court documents that the lawsuit falls outside the court's jurisdiction because the First Amendment prohibits courts from taking indirect control over Church affairs.
Meyer said the pressure on the church to allow the monument to be erected reflects a flaw in today's society.
"Our culture breaks all the rules to make people feel good," Meyer said. "Faithful Christians know rules and regulations are set up so there can be good for everyone."
Shannon Carr declined to discuss the case, but her father-in-law, Henry Carr, said the dispute has created bitterness within the church community.
"I haven't been back to (St. Joseph) church and have asked that I not be buried there along with my son," he said. "I'm told the controversy is splitting the church apart, tearing it in half. But I guess that's what has to be done."
Link:
Friday, January 11, 2013
Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli says jail may be effective protest to contraception mandate
(Fox news) RICHMOND, Va. – Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli said on a radio program Wednesday that going to jail may be an effective way to protest a mandate tied to ObamaCare that requires employers to provide contraceptive coverage.
Appearing on on Iowa conservative radio host Steve Deace's syndicated show, the Republican gubernatorial candidate said civil disobedience is one way to attack the federal health care law's requirement.
The so-called contraceptive mandate is now being challenged in a federal lawsuit by the Hobby Lobby stores. The company is primarily concerned about coverage for the morning-after pill, which some consider an abortion-causing drug.
Cuccinelli called the mandate an attack on the Roman Catholic Church and religious freedom and suggested that opponents fight back by forcing the feds to crack down on those who don't comply.
Cuccinelli, who is Catholic, said he had spoken to a bishop who suggested he'd go to jail to protest it.
"My local bishop said he told a group, `Well, you know, I told a group I'm ready to go to jail,' and I told him, `Bishop, don't take this personally - you need to go to jail," Cuccinelli said, trying to balance levity with seriousness.
Hobby Lobby and Mardel Inc., a religious book seller owned by the same conservative Christian family, plan to defy the federal health care law that requires employee health care plans to provide insurance coverage for the morning-after pill and similar emergency contraception. The company risks fines up to $1.3 million a day.
The companies are suing to block the requirement in the federal law, claiming it violates their owners' religious beliefs. They say the morning-after pill is tantamount to abortion because it can prevent a fertilized egg from becoming implanted in a woman's womb.
In three years as attorney general, Cuccinelli has pursued aggressive efforts to restrict abortion in Virginia. Last year, Cuccinelli forced the State Board of Health to reverse a decision to exempt existing abortion clinics from a new law that required them to meet the same architectural standards as new hospitals by saying the board overstepped its bounds and refusing to certify the board's regulations.
He was also the first state attorney general to file a federal lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the 2010 federal health care reforms. In September 2011, a federal appeals court rejected Virginia's challenge to the law, saying that the state didn't have the right to bring a lawsuit.
In his interview with Deace, Cuccinelli said employers who want to challenge the law may have to make the hard decision to go to jail to "provide an example of what tyranny means when it's played to its logical conclusion."
"Abraham Lincoln has many good quotes, but one of them is `The best way to get rid of a bad law is to enforce it vigorously," Cuccinelli said on the show, which is carried in several states.
Democrats and abortion-rights groups blasted Cuccinelli starting Wednesday evening after Politico reported Cuccinelli's comments from the night before.
"For Virginia's chief legal officer to suggest that citizens break the law is not only reckless, it's dangerous," said Democratic state Sen. Mark Herring, who is running for the office Cuccinelli will vacate.
NARAL Pro-Choice Virginia, the foremost reproductive rights lobby in Richmond, tweeted: "Ken Cuccinelli thinks ppl (people) should go to jail to oppose better access to birth control. And he wants to be our Gov?!"
Efforts to mandate vaginally invasive ultrasound exams before all abortions produced angry state Capitol protests in Richmond last winter and subjected Cuccinelli, Gov. Bob McDonnell and other Republicans in an election year to nationwide unfavorable headlines and ridicule by television comedians.
Link:
Tuesday, January 8, 2013
France's Hollande escalates row with Catholics over gay marriage
He defended Education Minister Vincent Peillon on Saturday for urging Catholic schools, which teach about one-fifth of all pupils in France, to stay neutral in the debate.
Peillon's supporters and critics dominated the headlines and airwaves on Sunday, a week before a Church-backed protest in Paris that organizers say could draw as many as half a million people opposed to any change in traditional marriage.
The shrill polemics could not drown out another big news story, the growing unpopularity of Hollande and his government. One poll said 75 percent of voters doubt he can keep a New Year's promise to turn around rising unemployment this year.
Laurent Wauquiez, a former conservative higher education minister, slammed Peillon for implying that Catholic opposition to the reform was responsible for suicides of gay teenagers.
"This is a big political manipulation," he said.
Conservatives also cried foul because government spokeswoman Najat Vallaud-Belkacem was filmed in a state school last October praising the marriage reform as progress towards more freedom.
Opinion polls show up to 60 percent of the French back same-sex marriage, which the government plans to legalize by June, and just under 50 percent support adoption rights for gays.
A new poll said 69 percent wanted a referendum on the issue, which all main religions here - Catholic, Muslim, Protestant, Jewish and Orthodox Christian - have opposed.
SECULAR RALLYING CRY
Peillon triggered the row by saying the director of Catholic education system, heavily subsidized by the state, was wrong to urge his schools to discuss same-sex marriage with pupils.
"This education system, which is under contract to the state, should respect the principle of neutrality and the freedom of conscience of all," he stated in a letter to regional education officials who oversee both state and private schools.
These officials should scrutinize the Catholic debates and report any anti-gay views aired in them, Peillon said, urging extreme caution on this issue because young homosexuals were five times more prone to suicide than heterosexual youths.
Hollande backed him in the name of "laicite", the legal separation of church and state that is a secular rallying cry for French opposed to any religion in the public sphere.
"Laicite is a principle of the Republic," he said.
Religious leaders have encouraged people to join next Sunday's protest but most will not march themselves.
Opponents of the new law caught its supporters off guard in November when they brought about 100,000 out in Paris for what was meant as a warm-up to the protest in a week's time.
The protest will converge on the Eiffel Tower and include people from all over France, organizers said.
Although few in traditionally Catholic France attend Mass on Sunday, the Church can still rally crowds larger than most political protests when its core interests are threatened.
Passing the law would make France the 12th country around the world to legalize same-sex marriage. It is already allowed in Argentina, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Iceland, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, South Africa, Spain, and Sweden.
In the United States, Washington, D.C. and nine states have legalized it, three of them in last November's elections.
(Editing by Louise Ireland)
Link:
Thursday, December 27, 2012
Professor says Pope should be executed for ‘premeditated mass murder’
By Oliver Darcy
(CampusReform.org) A professor in Austria accused the Catholic Pope of “premeditated mass murder” in a blog post this year, writing he deserves to be executed for his adherence to the Church’s stance on contraception.
An Austrian professor argued the Pope should be sentenced to death for his opposition to the use of contraception.
Richard Parncutt, who is a professor of systematic musicology at the University of Graz, also suggested in the October post that most of Vatican’s high level advisors ought also to face the death penalty.
“[T]he Pope and perhaps some of his closest advisers should be sentenced to death,” he wrote.
“I am talking about the current Pope, because his continuing refusal to make a significant change to the church’s position on contraception will certainly result in millions of further unnecessary deaths from AIDS in the future.”
Catholic doctrine holds that the use of contraception is a mortal sin and discourages the use of condoms, which many believe could significantly prevent the spread of AIDS in Africa.
Parncutt maintains in his column that otherwise he has “always been opposed to the death penalty,” classifying the punishment as “barbaric” and “racist.”
“Even mass murderers should not be executed,” he wrote before making a special exception for the Pope because of the mass casualties he says have been caused by the doctrine.
In the same opinion piece, Parncutt also accuses the Catholic Church’s “racist” because many of those who affected by AID are on the African continent.
“Those dying from AIDS are predominantly black,” he wrote.
Campus Reform could not reach Parncutt or a spokesperson for the University of Graz for comment in time for.
In the column, Parncutt extended his support for the death penalty to influential skeptics of man-made global warming.
“They are already causing the deaths of hundreds of millions of people,” Parncutt alleges. “We could be speaking of billions, but I am making a conservative estimate.”
In July, he created an online petition to apply a “global wealth tax” to the globe’s wealthiest one-percent.
Link:
(CampusReform.org) A professor in Austria accused the Catholic Pope of “premeditated mass murder” in a blog post this year, writing he deserves to be executed for his adherence to the Church’s stance on contraception.
An Austrian professor argued the Pope should be sentenced to death for his opposition to the use of contraception.
Richard Parncutt, who is a professor of systematic musicology at the University of Graz, also suggested in the October post that most of Vatican’s high level advisors ought also to face the death penalty.
“[T]he Pope and perhaps some of his closest advisers should be sentenced to death,” he wrote.
“I am talking about the current Pope, because his continuing refusal to make a significant change to the church’s position on contraception will certainly result in millions of further unnecessary deaths from AIDS in the future.”
Catholic doctrine holds that the use of contraception is a mortal sin and discourages the use of condoms, which many believe could significantly prevent the spread of AIDS in Africa.
Parncutt maintains in his column that otherwise he has “always been opposed to the death penalty,” classifying the punishment as “barbaric” and “racist.”
“Even mass murderers should not be executed,” he wrote before making a special exception for the Pope because of the mass casualties he says have been caused by the doctrine.
In the same opinion piece, Parncutt also accuses the Catholic Church’s “racist” because many of those who affected by AID are on the African continent.
“Those dying from AIDS are predominantly black,” he wrote.
Campus Reform could not reach Parncutt or a spokesperson for the University of Graz for comment in time for.
In the column, Parncutt extended his support for the death penalty to influential skeptics of man-made global warming.
“They are already causing the deaths of hundreds of millions of people,” Parncutt alleges. “We could be speaking of billions, but I am making a conservative estimate.”
In July, he created an online petition to apply a “global wealth tax” to the globe’s wealthiest one-percent.
Link:
Friday, December 21, 2012
When Christmas Was Banned in Massachusetts
By Kevin Seamus Hasson
(The Wall Street Journal) Does it sometimes seem as if the Christmas wars—namely the battle between secularists and believers over how and where Christmas and Hanukkah (not to mention other faiths' holidays) should be recognized—have been around forever? If so, you're not far off. The opening shots of the war, at least in America, were fired in Plymouth Colony itself. And after nearly 400 years, it's past time we learned our lesson and ceased hostilities.
Both factions still make the same fundamental mistake the Pilgrims did in Plymouth Colony. In Plymouth, culture was served up in one simple, strong flavor: Pilgrim. The Pilgrims were in charge and they knew it. Dissidents, and they were few, were not allowed to voice their dissent, let alone protest.
The contrast between October and December 1621 in Plymouth is a telling illustration of culture Pilgrim-style. In October, the Pilgrims held what has come to be called the First Thanksgiving. It lasted several days, featuring marksmanship and other contests in addition to good food. In short, it was about as communal and festive as the Pilgrims could ever be. Two months later, however, on "the day called Christmas Day," their leader, Governor William Bradford, recorded in his journal that he "called them out to work."
That was normal. For the Pilgrims, Dec. 25 was a day just like any other. Christmas, they thought, was a "papist" invention. Unlike their feast days, they couldn't find it in the Bible, so they wouldn't celebrate it. The previous year, they had spent their first Christmas in Plymouth splitting lumber.
But a year later not everyone agreed. Some newly arrived colonists objected that "it went against their consciences to work" on Christmas. So Bradford grudgingly excused them "till they were better informed" and led the wiser, more veteran colonists away to work. Returning at noon, however, he was horrified to discover the newcomers "in the street at play, openly" engaged in various sports.
In other words, the newcomers were doing exactly what the Pilgrims had done two months earlier. But this was different. This was no Pilgrim-proclaimed holiday. This was that dangerous innovation—Christ's Mass.
The governor knew what he had to do. He confiscated their sports equipment, telling them that if they insisted on celebrating Christmas as a "matter of devotion" they could do so privately at home, "but there should be no gaming or reveling in the streets." It was no isolated tantrum. A generation later, the colony formally outlawed Christmas for 22 years.
The double standard was blatant. Only two months before they suppressed the Christmas revelers, the Pilgrims had held their own "gaming and reveling" for Thanksgiving. They knew well that it's only natural for people to want to celebrate special times together. A holiday spent in enforced privacy is not much of a holiday at all.
Suppressing the Christmas revelers was obviously a cruel thing to do. But here we are, nearly 400 years later, still debating whether to allow religious holidays out in public or, God forbid, on public property. Some alarmists fear public display of any faith tradition but their own. Others seek to paper over the nation's diversity of traditions by insisting on a homogenized, religion-free culture. (If they had lived in Plymouth Colony, no doubt their answer to Christmas would have been to ban Thanksgiving, too.)
All the alarmists agree on this much, though: Others' holiday celebrations are tolerable only in private, and never in the public square—a vintage 1621 solution. "Ah, but you see," they all say, "religion in public is uniquely divisive. That's why the Constitution restricts it."
Nonsense. Elsewhere in the world, people fight and even slaughter each other over ethnic differences at least as much as they do over religious ones. And our Constitution bars government ethnic preferences just as stringently as it does religious ones. Yet our courts are not clogged with English-Americans seeking to enjoin St. Patrick's Day parades. It's obvious that municipal embrace and even sponsorship of them is not a harbinger of ethnic cleansing to come. It's simply government acknowledgment of one of many ethnic elements in our culture.
There's no reason—constitutional or otherwise—why governments cannot do the same and welcome public displays of menorahs, Christmas trees, nativity scenes and the like as simply some of the many religious elements in our culture.
Four hundred years is plenty long enough. Let's climb out of the 17th century and call a halt to the Christmas wars.
Mr. Hasson is the founder of the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty and the author of "The Right to be Wrong: Ending the Culture War Over Religion in America" (Image, 2012), from which this is adapted.
Link:
Related:
Tuesday, November 27, 2012
Hitler’s Pope, Nazi Crimes, and The New York Times
By Father Gordon J. MacRae
New evidence unmasks a myth that Pope Pius XII was “Hitler’s Pope:’ and a shocking failure of The New York Times to tell the world of the Holocaust.
These Stone Walls might seem a strange place to be reading this story, but in a way it might make sense. Too many Catholic writers today seem to fear The New York Times and the rest of the mainstream news media.
It’s a subtle fear that I laid out in “The Catholic Press Needs to Get Over Its Father Maciel Syndrome.” There are courageous exceptions, of course, and notable among them are Bill Donohue of The Catholic League and David F. Pierre of The Media Report. Both have repeatedly and forcefully called The New York Times to task for its distortions of news pertaining to the Catholic Church. Nowhere have these distortions been more evident than in the Catholic sex abuse scandal, a drama I have lived every day for the last 18 years. It’s also a drama that leads the late 20th Century litany of anti-Catholic agendas in the news. I gave several examples in a post entitled “Catholic Scandal and the News Media.”
Running a close second in that litany is the story of Pope Pius XII during the Holocaust. You have all read or heard the claims that Pope Pius XII was silent, at best, during the Holocaust, and at worst secured an accommodation with the Third Reich that saved the Catholic Church at the expense of the Jews. It’s not at all true, but the truth has had an uphill climb against the pervasive story, told again and again, that Pope Pius XII failed to confront Hitler during his systematic genocide of over six million European Jews and millions of others. You’ve heard the story of this supposed silence in a slanderous media sound bite that Pope Pius XII was “Hitler’s Pope.” Next to the “pedophile priest” propaganda, it is probably the most often used and abused modern anti-Catholic slur. But simply put, it is a lie.
Newly emerging evidence reveals that the entire story was the result of an organized propaganda effort sponsored by the Soviet KGB to discredit Pope Pius XII and the Catholic Church. It’s a shocking story, the stuff of Tom Clancy novels and wild conspiracy theories, but it’s also true, and I’ll unravel that truth in a few moments... (continued)
Link:
Wednesday, October 31, 2012
Saturday, October 13, 2012
Obama’s Communist Mentor on the Catholic Church
By
(Crisis Magazine) He blasted big business, Wall Street, big oil, General Motors, “excess profits,” “millionaires” and the “wealthy.” He called out the “corporation executive” for not paying his “fair” share.
He attacked “GOP” tax cuts that “spare the rich” and “benefit millionaires.”
He advocated wealth redistribution from greedy “corporations” to “health insurance” and “public works projects.”
He described himself as “progressive,” while his detractors accused him of being a communist.
He adopted slogans like “Forward” and “Change.” He wanted to transform America through what he called “fundamental change.”
He was skeptical of preachers and their effect on God-and-gun clinging Americans, and saw the Catholic Church as an obstacle to his vision for the state. He argued that Christians should support his ideas and enthusiastically sought the support of the “social justice” Religious Left. Moreover, many people were unclear about his personal religious beliefs, including whether he was a Christian.
Who is this man?
If you answered “Barack Obama,” you’re only half right. The answer is Frank Marshall Davis, Hawaii mentor to a young Barack Obama, and Communist Party member 47544.
Davis was introduced to a nine-year-old Obama in the fall of 1970 by Obama’s grandfather, Stanley Dunham, who was seeking a black-male role model or father figure to mentor his grandson. He and the young Obama met many times throughout the 1970s, often for hours at a time late into evenings. Obama refers to Davis literally dozens of times in every part of his bestselling memoirs, Dreams from My Father.
Long ignored, Davis is the subject of my new book—and Catholics should pay attention, given that Davis had some choice words for them and their church. Not unlike the young man he mentored, Barack Obama, Davis saw the Catholic Church as an obstacle to his vision for the state.
Frank Marshall Davis’s vision was a very far-left one. He pushed the federal government to adopt socialist policies, with more and more power concentrated in Washington. He wanted the United States to go the direction of the Soviet Union. And Davis understood that the one institution standing in the way most vehemently was the Roman Catholic Church. “The Catholic hierarchy,” he sneered, had launched a “holy war against communism.”
Indeed it had—and deservedly so. Nothing anywhere in the world persecuted the religious—and people generally—quite like communism. The Church correctly saw Soviet communism as truly, genuinely evil. But Frank Marshall Davis fully disagreed, and he would target the Church as an obstacle to his plans to fundamentally change America.
And so, Davis targeted the Church in commentaries he wrote for the Chicago Star, the Communist Party publication of which he was the founding editor-in-chief from 1946-48.
In one commentary, a July 20, 1946 piece titled, “A-Bombs for Russia,” Davis began by expressing his admiration for Stalin’s Russia: “I salute the Soviet Union,” stated Davis. “I admire Russia for wiping out an economic system which permitted a handful of rich to exploit and beat gold from the millions of plain people…. As one who believes in freedom and democracy for all, I honor the Red nation.”
Yet, as Davis hailed Joe Stalin’s state for its alleged freedom and democracy, there was something else he didn’t admire: It was the “Big Money Boys” and so-called “prostitute press [that] brazenly solicits public hate for [the Soviet Union].” Among those that Davis listed as “hate evangelists” was Cardinal Francis Spellman, who, by Davis’s estimation, longed to “knock out Russia” by bombing it to the Stone Age.
Said Davis: “We’ve got to make the plain people realize that those hate evangelists preaching war against Russia are their enemies, and that peace, freedom and democracy can come only from forcing official America to work in harmony with the Soviet Union.”
Yes, that is, Stalin’s Soviet Union—which, according to Frank Marshall Davis, wanted peace.
Who was obstructing that peace? Davis blamed Harry Truman, the Marshall Plan, Wall Street, big business, capitalism, the press, and the likes of Cardinal Spellman and the Catholic Church. Not only were these sources “hate evangelists,” according to Frank Marshall Davis, but they were the new “Pontius Pilates.”
Davis portrayed communism and the Soviet Union as friendly to Christianity; thus, those opposing Soviet communism were, in the words of Frank Marshall Davis, modern-day “Pontius Pilates.”
A painful illustration of this thinking was a September 29, 1949 column that Davis wrote for the Honolulu Record, the Communist Party publication for Hawaii, which he wrote for from 1949-57. Titled, “Challenge to the Church,” Davis imagined Judgment Day, where anti-communist Christians would be called to account for their transgressions: “On your Judgment Day, when the Lord will ask you for an account of your stewardship, will … your answer be, ‘Lord I was too busy Redbaiting?”
And the Catholic Church especially deserved a good scourging. “The Christian churches, and the Catholic church in particular,” preached Barack Obama’s mentor, “are making a grievous error in their shortsighted belief that the major enemy of Christianity is Communism.”
Not a communist in Moscow would have agreed with Frank Marshall Davis, and the late Lenin would have laughed him out of the country—or thanked him for his efforts.
Not only was Soviet Russia not anti-religious, said Davis, but it had saved the world from Hitler’s “anti-Christian paganism.” Really, Christians worldwide should pay homage to Stalin. Instead, they were blinded by their anti-communist bigotry.
Here, as in so many of these cases, Davis, not unlike Barack Obama, was a man of the far left making appeals to the “social justice” Religious Left for support, especially liberal Protestants.
And when the Catholic Church did not accommodate his plans and policies for the state, Frank Marshall Davis, like Barack Obama, simply told the Church that it was wrong and didn’t bend. Imagine that... (continued)
Monday, September 24, 2012
France set to ban the words 'mother' and 'father' from official documents
France is set to ban the words "mother" and "father" from all official documents under controversial plans to legalise gay marriage.
France's Justice Minister Christiane Taubira Photo: Reuters
(The Telegraph) The move, which has outraged Catholics, means only the word "parents" would be used in identical marriage ceremonies for all heterosexual and same-sex couples.
The draft law states that "marriage is a union of two people, of different or the same gender".
It says all references to "mothers and fathers" in the civil code – which enshrines French law – will be swapped for simply "parents".
The law would also give equal adoption rights to homosexual and heterosexual couples.
Justice Minister Christiane Taubira told France's Catholic newspaper La Croix: "Who is to say that a heterosexual couple will bring a child up better than a homosexual couple, that they will guarantee the best conditions for the child's development?"
"What is certain is that the interest of the child is a major preoccupation for the government."
The head of the French Catholic Church Cardinal Philippe Barbarin warned followers last week that gay marriage could lead to legalised incest and polygamy in society.
He told the Christian's RFC radio station: "Gay marriage would herald a complete breakdown in society.
"This could have innumerable consequences. Afterward they will want to create couples with three or four members. And after that, perhaps one day the taboo of incest will fall."
Leading French Catholics have also published a 'Prayer for France', which says: "Children should not be subjected to adults' desires and conflicts, so they can fully benefit from the love of their mother and father."
And Pope Benedict XVI invited 30 French bishops to Italy to urge them to fight against the new law.
He told them: "We have there a true challenge to take on.
"The family that is the foundation of social life is threatened in many places, following a concept of human nature that has proven defective."
President Francois Hollande pledged in his manifesto to legalise gay marriage. The draft law will be presented to his cabinet for approval on October 31.
Link:
Monday, September 10, 2012
SNAP: Support for Abuse Victims or Anti-Catholic Politicking?
Barbara Blaine, David Clohessy, and Fr.
Thomas Doyle, O.P.
Conference speakers indicate a larger political agenda.
By David F. Pierre, Jr.
Anyone who has watched the Catholic Church abuse narrative unfold in the media over the past several years has likely encountered SNAP, the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests, a body which bills itself as the “largest, oldest, and most active support group” for clergy abuse victims. The organization has been quite successful in building its presence and influence in the media, as journalists and writers often turn to the group when seeking a voice critical of the Church for its handling of abuse cases.
Barbara Blaine, a woman who claims to have been abused by a priest as a teenager, founded SNAP in 1988. The group convened its first meeting in 1991, and David Clohessy, a Missouri man who has also claimed abuse by a priest, joined the group in a leadership role a year later. Prior to joining SNAP, Clohessy worked for nearly a decade for the now-disgraced, radical activist group ACORN.
However, while SNAP’s stated mission is “to provide support for men and women who have been sexually victimized by members of the clergy,” the group’s leadership has allied itself with a progressive social agenda and a full-scale assault on the teaching authority of the Catholic Church.
The real agenda at play?
This past March in Washington, DC, SNAP President Blaine appeared as a featured guest at a high-voltage conference called “Women Money Power,” hosted by Feminist Majority, a very influential pro-abortion lobbying group. At the conference Blaine was joined noted activists Eleanor Smeal, Sandra Fluke, and Dawn Laguens (a vice president at Planned Parenthood) for a panel discussion titled “Bishops, Politicians, and the War on Women’s Health.”
The panelists took turns railing against Catholic leaders for their positions on “reproductive freedom” (read: contraception and abortion) and their opposition to the Obama administration’s healthcare mandate. Needless to say, the venom in the room against the Catholic Church was palpable.
Most notably, Blaine sat right next to Rev. Barry Lynn, the well-traveled president of Americans United for the Separation of Church and State whose progressive views have made him a fixture on cable television talk shows.
Blaine must have really appreciated Rev. Lynn’s talk (which can be viewed on YouTube), because just a few months later he appeared as a headline speaker at SNAP’s annual conference in Chicago. On that occasion, the energetic Lynn—a minister in the United Church of Christ—simply built upon his Church-bashing speech from the Feminist Majority conference, claiming that Catholic bishops have “no moral authority” to speak on women’s issues and human sexuality and asserting that the Church’s opposition to the Department of Health and Human Services’ contraception mandate was a “total fraud” and an “unimaginable distortion of the very idea of freedom.” According to Lynn, the Church’s objections to the HHS mandate were not really about religious liberty, but about being given “special treatment” and the “power” to impose their religious doctrine on others.
What did any of this have to do with the topic of clergy sex abuse? Why did Blaine choose Lynn to speak at her conference? They are good questions. Lynn made a brave attempt to tie the subject of clergy abuse to his talk, but ultimately the issue served as little more than a vehicle for a larger assault on the Catholic Church and advocacy for left-leaning social policies.
Child abuse is “allowed” in the Catholic Church?
Another speaker at SNAP’s Chicago conference was author Judy Braun (she has also published under the names “Judy Brown” and “Eishes Chayil,” which means “woman of valor”). In a wild presentation titled “Monotheism and Child Sacrifice,” Braun argued that Jewish communities and the Catholic Church view the sexual abuse of children as an acceptable form of child sacrifice, with roots in the biblical story of Abraham and Isaac... (continued)
Link:
Friday, September 7, 2012
Time To Put Our House In Order (The Bitter Pill)
From Mac McLernon at Mulier Fortis:
Link:"Before the Catholic blogosphere took off, the only sources of information for ordinary Catholics were papers such as The Pill. Unfortunately, The Pill has, for quite some time, been giving rather a lot of publishing space to individuals who are actually opposed to Church teaching. One such individual is Prof. Tina Beattie, who, as director of the Digby Stuart Research Centre for Catholic Studies at the University of Roehampton, certainly should not be writing against the Church's position on subjects such as abortion and same-sex "marriage."
If The Pill wishes to campaign against the teachings of the Church, then it should not be sold as a Catholic publication, and definitely not be made available for sale in Catholic parishes and cathedrals."
Thursday, September 6, 2012
Is the Higgs Boson the “God Particle?”
By Father Gordon J. MacRae
...If ever you bristle about the typical anti-Catholic mythology that religion attempts to hold back science, remember that the originator of all the science behind this model of creation was a Catholic priest, and many of the great scientists of his time did everything they could to suppress his ideas. They failed because they could not successfully refute either his faith or his science. In the end, even Einstein bowed to Father Lemaitre declaring that his model “was the most satisfactory explanation of creation I have ever heard.” If you have not read “A Day Without Yesterday,” please do.
Pope Pius XII applauded Father Lemaitre’s discovery of The Big Bang
because it challenged the acceptable science of the time which claimed
that the Universe was not created, but always existed and is eternal.
Einstein later acknowledged that this “Cosmological Constant” was his
greatest error...
On July fourth, physicists announced they had a momentary glimpse of the elusive Higgs boson, the subatomic particle long theorized to exist, and without which matter itself would not exist. The physicists who reported that they only found “evidence” of the Higgs boson are just being careful scientists. The discovery has a 99.9999% rate of certainty. There is no doubt left. The Higgs boson does indeed exist.
SO, IS IT “THE GOD PARTICLE?”
The short answer is “no.” Imagine for a moment that you’re on an archeological dig on the outskirts of Rome. Standing in your carefully excavated hole, your spade strikes a metal box. Inside you discover a small, worn chisel, and a note written in 16th Century Italian: “Herein lies my favorite chisel.” The note is signed, “Michelangelo Buonarroti.”
Well, if you’re an art historian, what you now hold might be priceless. If you’re also a person of faith who has viewed the magnificence of Michelangelo’s Pieta, you may treasure this forever as one of the tools used to create a work of artistic genius. Your discovery might land on a shelf with your name on it in the Vatican Museum. There will be no doubt that what you discovered is a tool used to create an inspired work of art, but it is not itself the art’s creator.
What does the discovery of the Higgs boson mean for faith in a Universe created by God? Absolutely nothing. To say that the Higgs boson and gravity are responsible for the creation of our Universe is sort of like saying that Michelangelo did not sculpt the Pieta, his chisel did... (continued)
...If ever you bristle about the typical anti-Catholic mythology that religion attempts to hold back science, remember that the originator of all the science behind this model of creation was a Catholic priest, and many of the great scientists of his time did everything they could to suppress his ideas. They failed because they could not successfully refute either his faith or his science. In the end, even Einstein bowed to Father Lemaitre declaring that his model “was the most satisfactory explanation of creation I have ever heard.” If you have not read “A Day Without Yesterday,” please do.
Pope Pius XII applauded Father Lemaitre’s discovery of The Big Bang
because it challenged the acceptable science of the time which claimed
that the Universe was not created, but always existed and is eternal.
Einstein later acknowledged that this “Cosmological Constant” was his
greatest error...On July fourth, physicists announced they had a momentary glimpse of the elusive Higgs boson, the subatomic particle long theorized to exist, and without which matter itself would not exist. The physicists who reported that they only found “evidence” of the Higgs boson are just being careful scientists. The discovery has a 99.9999% rate of certainty. There is no doubt left. The Higgs boson does indeed exist.
SO, IS IT “THE GOD PARTICLE?”
The short answer is “no.” Imagine for a moment that you’re on an archeological dig on the outskirts of Rome. Standing in your carefully excavated hole, your spade strikes a metal box. Inside you discover a small, worn chisel, and a note written in 16th Century Italian: “Herein lies my favorite chisel.” The note is signed, “Michelangelo Buonarroti.”
Well, if you’re an art historian, what you now hold might be priceless. If you’re also a person of faith who has viewed the magnificence of Michelangelo’s Pieta, you may treasure this forever as one of the tools used to create a work of artistic genius. Your discovery might land on a shelf with your name on it in the Vatican Museum. There will be no doubt that what you discovered is a tool used to create an inspired work of art, but it is not itself the art’s creator.
What does the discovery of the Higgs boson mean for faith in a Universe created by God? Absolutely nothing. To say that the Higgs boson and gravity are responsible for the creation of our Universe is sort of like saying that Michelangelo did not sculpt the Pieta, his chisel did... (continued)
Tuesday, July 24, 2012
Fr. Rutler: Post-Comfortable Christianity and the Election of 2012
By Father George Rutler
Tragedy and comedy intertwine, ultimately issuing in glory, whenever he is on
trial. He longs to live and to die in the same breath: ”For to me to live is
Christ and to die is gain” (Philippians 1:210). Whenever he is on trial for his
life, he invokes a forensic brilliance to save the very life he is willing to
sacrifice. Just as Jesus who had come into the world to die, slipped through
the mob in Nazareth because his hour had not yet come, so does Paul become his
own defense when on trial, ready to die by God’s calendar and not man’s.
In Caesarea, he confounds Antonius Felix, the Roman governor of Judaea and Samaria, and a little later he does the same to the successor of Felix, Procius Festus. The best court scene is Paul before Marcus Annaeus Novatus, who had taken the name of his adoptive father Junius Gallio, the rhetorician and friend of his father Seneca Sr. whose son Seneca, Jr. was the noble Stoic. Nero forced Seneca’s suicide, but before that, in Achaia where Gallio was proconsul, Paul was bit of a Rumpole of the Bailey, in how he played the jury like a piano to the frustration of the judge. The point is this: Paul, both innocent and shrewd, was willing to suffer and did so regularly, as he was not loathe to recount at length, and he was also ready to die, but as death comes but once, he wanted it to be at the right moment.
There is in Paul a model for Catholics at the start of the Third Millennium which began with fireworks and Ferris wheels but is now entering a sinister stage. Like Paul, it is not possible to be a Christian without living for Christ by suffering for him, nor is it possible to be a Christian without willing to die for him when he wants. The Christian veneer of American culture has cracked and underneath is the inverse of the blithe Christianity that took shape in the various enthusiasms of the nineteenth century and ended when voters were under the impression that they finally had a Catholic president.
This new period is not “Post-Christian” because nothing comes after Christ. We can, however, call it “Post-Comfortable Christian...” (continued)
Link:
(Crisis Magazine) Shortly
before he died in Oxford in 1988, the Jesuit retreat master and
raconteur, Bernard Bassett, in good spirits after a double leg amputation, told
me that the great lights of his theological formation had been Ignatius Loyola
and John Henry Newman, but if he “had to do it all over,” he’d only read Paul.
“Everything is there.” There is a temptation to think that God gave us the
Apostle to the Gentiles in order to have second readings at Sunday Mass, usually
unrelated to the first reading and the Gospel. But everything truly is there.
Paul was one of the most important figures in human history, and a great
character to boot. That is, a character in the happiest sense of the word.
“But by the grace of God I am what I am, and his grace toward me was not in
vain” (1 Cor 15:10).
In Caesarea, he confounds Antonius Felix, the Roman governor of Judaea and Samaria, and a little later he does the same to the successor of Felix, Procius Festus. The best court scene is Paul before Marcus Annaeus Novatus, who had taken the name of his adoptive father Junius Gallio, the rhetorician and friend of his father Seneca Sr. whose son Seneca, Jr. was the noble Stoic. Nero forced Seneca’s suicide, but before that, in Achaia where Gallio was proconsul, Paul was bit of a Rumpole of the Bailey, in how he played the jury like a piano to the frustration of the judge. The point is this: Paul, both innocent and shrewd, was willing to suffer and did so regularly, as he was not loathe to recount at length, and he was also ready to die, but as death comes but once, he wanted it to be at the right moment.
There is in Paul a model for Catholics at the start of the Third Millennium which began with fireworks and Ferris wheels but is now entering a sinister stage. Like Paul, it is not possible to be a Christian without living for Christ by suffering for him, nor is it possible to be a Christian without willing to die for him when he wants. The Christian veneer of American culture has cracked and underneath is the inverse of the blithe Christianity that took shape in the various enthusiasms of the nineteenth century and ended when voters were under the impression that they finally had a Catholic president.
This new period is not “Post-Christian” because nothing comes after Christ. We can, however, call it “Post-Comfortable Christian...” (continued)
Link:
Wednesday, July 18, 2012
Bigotry Explains False Accusations
Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments as follows:
False accusations against priests are hardly uncommon these days, but when anti-Catholicism accounts for lies against lay Catholics, the problem only worsens. Consider the latest news concerning Tim Udinski.
After Udinski was fired as the lacrosse coach at Lansdale Catholic High School last year, he made several accusations over a seven-month period claiming that the football coach and the new lacrosse coach were sexually abusing students. He also maintained that the principal of the suburban Philadelphia school, Tim Quinn, knew about the offenses.
After detectives spent 184 hours on this case, interviewing 97 people (at a cost of more than $8250), they determined that the charges were bogus. Standing by itself, this wouldn’t be big news, but what makes it so disturbing is Udinski’s motive: he has admitted that he fabricated the whole story, just so he could “get the Church.”
Landsdale Catholic High is in the Archdiocese of Philadelphia, and it was to the archdiocese that Udinski sent his anonymous e-mails. Montgomery County District Attorney Risa Vetri Ferman acknowledged that Udinski sought to exploit the high profile that the sexual abuse of minors has been given. Indeed, she questioned, “How do you undo that? How do you unring the bell?”
Here’s the clincher. When asked why he lied, Udinski said, “I just wanted to get back at the church, Tim Quinn, and I was just generally mad.” (My italics.)
Over the past three years, 173 false accusations have been made against Catholic priests nationwide. Also, on July 6, Philadelphia Archbishop Charles Chaput stated that four of the six priests who were recently investigated were found suitable for ministry. Isn’t it time we learned the names of those who make false charges? And how do we “unring the bell” for all those priests—and lay persons—whose reputations have been smeared by merchants of bigotry and greed?
Link:
False accusations against priests are hardly uncommon these days, but when anti-Catholicism accounts for lies against lay Catholics, the problem only worsens. Consider the latest news concerning Tim Udinski.
After Udinski was fired as the lacrosse coach at Lansdale Catholic High School last year, he made several accusations over a seven-month period claiming that the football coach and the new lacrosse coach were sexually abusing students. He also maintained that the principal of the suburban Philadelphia school, Tim Quinn, knew about the offenses.
After detectives spent 184 hours on this case, interviewing 97 people (at a cost of more than $8250), they determined that the charges were bogus. Standing by itself, this wouldn’t be big news, but what makes it so disturbing is Udinski’s motive: he has admitted that he fabricated the whole story, just so he could “get the Church.”
Landsdale Catholic High is in the Archdiocese of Philadelphia, and it was to the archdiocese that Udinski sent his anonymous e-mails. Montgomery County District Attorney Risa Vetri Ferman acknowledged that Udinski sought to exploit the high profile that the sexual abuse of minors has been given. Indeed, she questioned, “How do you undo that? How do you unring the bell?”
Here’s the clincher. When asked why he lied, Udinski said, “I just wanted to get back at the church, Tim Quinn, and I was just generally mad.” (My italics.)
Over the past three years, 173 false accusations have been made against Catholic priests nationwide. Also, on July 6, Philadelphia Archbishop Charles Chaput stated that four of the six priests who were recently investigated were found suitable for ministry. Isn’t it time we learned the names of those who make false charges? And how do we “unring the bell” for all those priests—and lay persons—whose reputations have been smeared by merchants of bigotry and greed?
Link:
Wednesday, September 14, 2011
The Cross In Utah
By Fr. Erik Richtsteig at Orthometer
A common experience for Catholics and other who wear a cross or a crucifix in Utah goes something like the following:
Mormon: Why do you wear THAT?
Crossie: Wear what?
Mormon: That cross thing.
Crossie: Because Jesus died on it.
Mormon: Well if you mom was shot would you wear a gun?
It could be noose, electric chair, or guillotine, but you get the point: Utah and its majority religion are not cross friendly. Moreover, verbal attacks, teasing, and bullying of young people by classmates can be especially brutal.
But why the aversion to what orthodox Christians see as a sign of Christ's triumph over the Devil? There are several possibilities as Mormon doctrine and theology is nothing if not fluid. First, according to the Mormons Jesus is not God incarnate. He is merely our elder brother and savior. It has been taught that He didn't atone for our sins by dying on the Cross, but by weeping blood in the garden. Second, there has historically been an aversion to anything that smacks of traditional Christianity; think Protestantism on steroids. Third, a couple of years ago, The Salt Lake Tribune published an interesting article concerning some research by a professor at Cal State Sacramento. His thesis is that the extreme anti-cross attitude can be traced to President David O. McKay's virulent anti-Catholicism. My personal opinion is that while this may have intensified the opposition, it had been very present before. I base this upon anecdotes heard from both Catholics and Mormons that predate McKay.
Anyhow, this is yet more evidence that Mormonism cannot be considered Christian in an orthodox theological sense. (Also, interesting parallels can be drawn to the hatred of the cross that one finds in Islam.)
"But God forbid that I should glory except in the Cross of Our Lord Jesus Christ, by which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world." -- Galatians 6:14.
(Image: murals in the sanctuary in the Cathedral of the Madeline, Salt Lake City.)
Monday, July 19, 2010
U.S. Atheists Reportedly Using Hair Dryers to 'De-Baptize'
(Fox News) American atheists lined up to be "de-baptized" in a ritual using a hair dryer, according to a report Friday on U.S. late-night news program "Nightline."
Leading atheist Edwin Kagin blasted his fellow non-believers with the hair dryer to symbolically dry up the holy water sprinkled on their heads in days past. The styling tool was emblazoned with a label reading "Reason and Truth."
Kagin believes parents are wrong to baptize their children before they are able to make their own choices, even slamming some religious education as "child abuse." He said the blast of hot air was a way for adults to undo what their parents had done.
"I was baptized Catholic. I don't remember any of it at all," said 24-year-old Cambridge Boxterman. "According to my mother, I screamed like a banshee ... so you can see that even as a young child I didn't want to be baptized. It's not fair. I was born atheist, and they were forcing me to become Catholic."
Kagin doned a monk's robe and said a few mock-Latin phrases before inviting those wishing to be de-baptized to "come forward now and receive the spirit of hot air that taketh away the stigma and taketh away the remnants of the stain of baptismal water."
Ironically, Kagin's own son became a fundamentalist Christian minister after having "a personal revelation in Jesus Christ."
"One wonders where they went wrong," he chuckled to the TV show.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)