Dr. Peter Kreeft - Be a Saint
In pursuit of the truth – cinops be gone – Saturday, January 31, 2009
Dr. Peter Kreeft is the author of nearly 50 books. When he is not writing books, he is also a professor of philosophy at Boston College. The following are excerpts from Envoy Magazine, V. 8.3 “How to Lose the Culture Wars.” Win it!
Sixth, be a saint, not a yuppie. You are part of the Kingdom of Heaven, not the Kingdom of this World. Learn the moves of your Lord. Forget yourself. Sacrifice. Give. It’s the secret of joy. Try it, you’ll like it.
There are two kinds of love: love and lust, charity and cupidity, giving and getting, agape and Eros. Just as selfishness seems the way to happiness but is really always the infallible and inevitable way to misery, so self-sacrifice out of love seems to be the way to misery but it is really the guaranteed way to joy. Experience the thrill of sacrifice. But if you can’t do it in love, don’t do it, because it won’t give you joy. If you can’t do it cheerfully, don’t give. The Lord blesses a cheerful giver.
Why are Muslims growing faster than anyone else? Our own Scripture gives us the embarrassing answer: Because God promised triumph over natural and supernatural enemies to those who obeyed His will and His law, and defeat to those who disobey. IF CHRISTIANS CONTINUE TO ABORT, CONTRACEPT, DIVORCE, FORNICATE, SODOMIZE, DISHONOR, AND LIE MORE THAN MUSLIMS DO, MUSLIMS WILL CONQUER THE CHRISTIAN WORLD.
The competition with Islam is not about oil or about money or about political power or about terrorism or even about nuclear bombs, IT IS ABOUT SAINTS. THE RELIGION WITH THE MOST SAINTS WILL WIN THE WORLD. THAT’S HOW WE WON IT ONCE, AND THAT’S HOW WE LOST IT, AND THAT’S HOW WE MUST WIN IT AGAIN.
The way to become a saint is very easy to understand and very hard to do.
IT IS SIMPLY TO GIVE GOD EVERYTHING.
Start with the mind. All that we are is made of our thoughts. {Buddha} Sow a thought. …. “Take every thought captive to Christ.”
Seventh, understand who our enemy is: it is not psychological miseries or maladjustments. It is not false ideologies or philosophies. It is sins. Our own sins.
Every sin is like a drop of blood drained like Dracula from every soul.
Every act of love is a drink of cold water given to every thirsty soul. There are no victimless crimes. Mankind is one body, and we help or harm the spiritual health of every single cell in that body, That is, every single person in the world, by every single thought and choice we make. The salvation of all is dependent on the sanctity of each. The more you love your neighbor, the more likely it is you will see him in heaven. Simply put, be real. Don’t be a phony. Be a saint.
George H. Kubeck, P.O. Box 865, Stanton, Ca. 90680-9998
Saturday, January 31, 2009
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
The Papacy
The Papacy
Memorial for St. Thomas Aquinas – Wednesday, January 28, 2009
In the year 1978, Pope Benedict XVI composed the following meditation for today’s date in his book, “Co-Workers of the Truth”, Meditations for Every Day.
“It would assuredly be foolish for us that there will be, in the foreseeable future, a general unification of Christianity under the papacy if this is understood to mean a recognition of Peter’s successor in Rome.
Perhaps it is also a part of the inevitable constraints and limitations of this mandate that it can never be fully executed and must, consequently, be a source of friction among Christian believers, who exhibit in its regard a quality that is not vicarship, but autocracy.
Nevertheless, it is not inconceivable that the Pope should exercise some kind of unifying role that transcends the community of the Roman Catholic Church.
Even for those who do not accept the claims of his office, the Pope personally is a sign to the world of a responsibility, transmitted and proclaimed, for the word of God and, consequently, a provocation of which all are aware and that concerns all not only to seek greater fidelity to the word, but also to strive for unity and to accept responsibility for the lack of unity.
In this sense, there is despite the separation, a function of the papacy that builds unity and that, in the last analysis, no one can erase from the historical drama of Christianity.
For the papacy and the Catholic Church, the criticism of the papacy by non-Catholic Christianity continues to be a spur to seek an ever more Christ-like realization of the Petrine ministry; for non-Catholic Christianity, on the other hand, the Pope continues to be a visible incitement to that concrete unity that is the responsibility of the Church and should be her sign before the world: may both sides succeed in accepting without reservation the question that is posed to us and the task that is given us and thus, in obedience to the Lord, become the dwelling-place of a peace that prepares the way for a new world – for the Kingdom of God.”(From Dienst an der Ein der Einheit, pp. 177-78, 1978.)
+++++++++++++++++++++++
Before we can have unity with other Christian Church we must have unity within the Catholic Church. There isn’t any. Why? We have some bishops, religious and laity not listening to the Pope and the Magisterium. For the Catholic laity that listens, it is frustrating.
How do you bridge the gap of lack of faith and fidelity? Historically, St. Thomas Aquinas has been glorified by the praises of theologians. Upon the requests of almost all the bishops of the Catholic world Leo XIII declared Thomas Patron of Catholic Schools, hoping thereby to offset the contagion of so many philosophical systems that were straying from the truth.
We also have Saints like St. Thomas More, his personal life and in the public arena that can help us overcome the most serious problems of dissent, and the scandals of the U.S. Catholic-in-name-only politicians. (CINOPS)
George H. Kubeck
Memorial for St. Thomas Aquinas – Wednesday, January 28, 2009
In the year 1978, Pope Benedict XVI composed the following meditation for today’s date in his book, “Co-Workers of the Truth”, Meditations for Every Day.
“It would assuredly be foolish for us that there will be, in the foreseeable future, a general unification of Christianity under the papacy if this is understood to mean a recognition of Peter’s successor in Rome.
Perhaps it is also a part of the inevitable constraints and limitations of this mandate that it can never be fully executed and must, consequently, be a source of friction among Christian believers, who exhibit in its regard a quality that is not vicarship, but autocracy.
Nevertheless, it is not inconceivable that the Pope should exercise some kind of unifying role that transcends the community of the Roman Catholic Church.
Even for those who do not accept the claims of his office, the Pope personally is a sign to the world of a responsibility, transmitted and proclaimed, for the word of God and, consequently, a provocation of which all are aware and that concerns all not only to seek greater fidelity to the word, but also to strive for unity and to accept responsibility for the lack of unity.
In this sense, there is despite the separation, a function of the papacy that builds unity and that, in the last analysis, no one can erase from the historical drama of Christianity.
For the papacy and the Catholic Church, the criticism of the papacy by non-Catholic Christianity continues to be a spur to seek an ever more Christ-like realization of the Petrine ministry; for non-Catholic Christianity, on the other hand, the Pope continues to be a visible incitement to that concrete unity that is the responsibility of the Church and should be her sign before the world: may both sides succeed in accepting without reservation the question that is posed to us and the task that is given us and thus, in obedience to the Lord, become the dwelling-place of a peace that prepares the way for a new world – for the Kingdom of God.”(From Dienst an der Ein der Einheit, pp. 177-78, 1978.)
+++++++++++++++++++++++
Before we can have unity with other Christian Church we must have unity within the Catholic Church. There isn’t any. Why? We have some bishops, religious and laity not listening to the Pope and the Magisterium. For the Catholic laity that listens, it is frustrating.
How do you bridge the gap of lack of faith and fidelity? Historically, St. Thomas Aquinas has been glorified by the praises of theologians. Upon the requests of almost all the bishops of the Catholic world Leo XIII declared Thomas Patron of Catholic Schools, hoping thereby to offset the contagion of so many philosophical systems that were straying from the truth.
We also have Saints like St. Thomas More, his personal life and in the public arena that can help us overcome the most serious problems of dissent, and the scandals of the U.S. Catholic-in-name-only politicians. (CINOPS)
George H. Kubeck
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
America in the Twilight Zone
America in the Twilight Zone
In pursuit of the truth – cinops be gone – Tuesday, January 27, 2008
Elections have consequences. Our nation will pay the price for these consequences. There are economic, social and spiritual consequences. The following is a teaching moment for Americans, particularly Catholics.
Speaker of the House CINOP Nancy Pelosi boldly defended a move to add birth control funding to the new economic “stimulus” package, claiming “contraception will reduce costs to the states and to the federal government.”
Pelosi, the mother of 5 children and 6 grandchildren, who once said, “Nothing in my life will ever, ever compare to being a Mom,” seemed to imply babies are somehow a burden on the treasury.
The revelation came during an exchange Sunday morning on ABC-s This Week:
STEPHANOPOULOS: Hundreds of million dollars to expand family planning services: How is that stimulus? (About 460 million dollars is involved.)
PELOSI: Well, the family planning services reduce cost. They reduce cost. The states are in terrible fiscal budget crises now and part of what we do for children’s health, education and some of those elements are to help the states meet their financial needs. One of those – one of the initiatives you mentioned, the contraception, will reduce costs to the states and to the federal government.
STEPHANOPOULOS: So no apologies for that?
PELOSI: No apologies. No, we have to deal with the consequences with the consequences of the downturn in our economy.
As a promoter of San Francisco and Planned Parenthood values Speaker Pelosi is a two-faced politician. Normal Americans can’t stand her political or religious remarks. The shepherds need to speak out ON THEIR OWN, publicly. The unanimity of bishops speaking out on this & other serious scandals is OVER.
+++++++++
Tom Brejcha, Founder and President of “Thomas More Society” has a revealing article on Governor Rod Blagojevic dated Jan. 23, 2008. Governor “Blago” is really the tip of the iceberg of POLITICAL AND RELIGIOUS corruption in Illinois originating with Chicago’s pro-choice Catholic politicians. In fact, President Obama himself is a VICTIM of these Catholic-in-name-only Politicians.
“But while Blago has made Illinois the laughing stock of America, his abortion antics with Planned Parenthood are no laughing matter. That’s right. We’ve now come to believe that Blago and Planned Parenthood are up to their eyeballs in yet another pay for play scandal. And we mean to find out all the facts!
You see, back in 2002 when Blago first ran for governor, Planned Parenthood’s Chicago-area director Steve Trombley (now its statewide CEO) said he would raise $10 million for Blago’s campaign! Yes, Blago was a “true blue” pro-abortion politician, but why so much money? Now we think we know why. Here in the “Land of Lincoln,” it’s called “pay to play.”
Trombley’s fundraising for Blago was his ticket to get access to Blago’ piggybank, the Illinois Finance Authority. And Blago came through for Planned Parenthood’s – big time! Tax-free bonds from Blago’s piggybank financed the building for the largest and most notorious abortion facility ever build in America – Planned Parenthood’s Aurora abortion mill!
The stench of “pay for play” is all over Aurora. It comes straight from the newly built 12 surgical recovery rooms in this Midwestern America version of Auschwitz.”
George H. Kubeck
In pursuit of the truth – cinops be gone – Tuesday, January 27, 2008
Elections have consequences. Our nation will pay the price for these consequences. There are economic, social and spiritual consequences. The following is a teaching moment for Americans, particularly Catholics.
Speaker of the House CINOP Nancy Pelosi boldly defended a move to add birth control funding to the new economic “stimulus” package, claiming “contraception will reduce costs to the states and to the federal government.”
Pelosi, the mother of 5 children and 6 grandchildren, who once said, “Nothing in my life will ever, ever compare to being a Mom,” seemed to imply babies are somehow a burden on the treasury.
The revelation came during an exchange Sunday morning on ABC-s This Week:
STEPHANOPOULOS: Hundreds of million dollars to expand family planning services: How is that stimulus? (About 460 million dollars is involved.)
PELOSI: Well, the family planning services reduce cost. They reduce cost. The states are in terrible fiscal budget crises now and part of what we do for children’s health, education and some of those elements are to help the states meet their financial needs. One of those – one of the initiatives you mentioned, the contraception, will reduce costs to the states and to the federal government.
STEPHANOPOULOS: So no apologies for that?
PELOSI: No apologies. No, we have to deal with the consequences with the consequences of the downturn in our economy.
As a promoter of San Francisco and Planned Parenthood values Speaker Pelosi is a two-faced politician. Normal Americans can’t stand her political or religious remarks. The shepherds need to speak out ON THEIR OWN, publicly. The unanimity of bishops speaking out on this & other serious scandals is OVER.
+++++++++
Tom Brejcha, Founder and President of “Thomas More Society” has a revealing article on Governor Rod Blagojevic dated Jan. 23, 2008. Governor “Blago” is really the tip of the iceberg of POLITICAL AND RELIGIOUS corruption in Illinois originating with Chicago’s pro-choice Catholic politicians. In fact, President Obama himself is a VICTIM of these Catholic-in-name-only Politicians.
“But while Blago has made Illinois the laughing stock of America, his abortion antics with Planned Parenthood are no laughing matter. That’s right. We’ve now come to believe that Blago and Planned Parenthood are up to their eyeballs in yet another pay for play scandal. And we mean to find out all the facts!
You see, back in 2002 when Blago first ran for governor, Planned Parenthood’s Chicago-area director Steve Trombley (now its statewide CEO) said he would raise $10 million for Blago’s campaign! Yes, Blago was a “true blue” pro-abortion politician, but why so much money? Now we think we know why. Here in the “Land of Lincoln,” it’s called “pay to play.”
Trombley’s fundraising for Blago was his ticket to get access to Blago’ piggybank, the Illinois Finance Authority. And Blago came through for Planned Parenthood’s – big time! Tax-free bonds from Blago’s piggybank financed the building for the largest and most notorious abortion facility ever build in America – Planned Parenthood’s Aurora abortion mill!
The stench of “pay for play” is all over Aurora. It comes straight from the newly built 12 surgical recovery rooms in this Midwestern America version of Auschwitz.”
George H. Kubeck
Monday, January 26, 2009
St. Thomas More - 8
St. Thomas More - 8
In pursuit of the truth – cinops be gone – Monday, January 26, 2009
More’s Early Years - 7 p. 48 – 51
The newly married couple first took up residence in a part of London known as Bucklersbury; here More was to reside for nearly 20 years, and it was here that all four of his children were born: Margaret (c. 1505-1544), Elizabeth (c. 1507 - ?), Cecily (c. 1507 - ?), and John (c. 1508/09-1547).
Father Bouge says that More was his parishioner while in London and that he had baptized two of More’s children. He was also More’s spiritual director, probably from 1508 to 1510, and thus was in a unique position to assess the state of the soul entrusted to him:
This Mr. More was my ghostly child: in his confession to be so pure, so clean, with great study, deliberation, and devotion, I never heard many such” a gentleman of great learning, both in law, art, and divinity, having no man like him now alive of a layman. Item, a gentleman of great soberness and gravity, one chief of the King’s Council, Item, a gentleman of little refection and marvelous diet.
More’s scholarship from these years: the translation into Latin of several of the Greek works of Lucian. He and Erasmus collaborated on these translations, and the fruit of their labors entitled Luciani Opuscala … ah Erasmo Toterodamo et Thoma Mora, was published in Paris in November 1506.
More begins by defending the value of reading the classical works of pagan writers such as Lucian, for valid lessons may be derived from these authors that can be applied within a Christian context. Thus Lucian’s dialogue “Philopseudes”, he notes, teaches us the pitfalls of mixing superstition with religion; similarly Christianity is done a grave disservice by those who embellish the lives of the saint with unfounded and fantastic tales:
…{T}hey have not scrupled to stain with fiction that religion which was founded by {T}ruth {Himself} and ought to consist of naked truth. They have failed to see that such fables are so far from aiding religion that nothing can be more injurious to it. It is obvious, as St. Augustine himself has observed that where there is any scent of a lie, the authority of truth is immediately weakened and destroyed…
More’s words above should not be misunderstood as somehow constituting a rejection on his part of all reported miracles other than those contained in Sacred Scripture. We will later see from his own writings elsewhere that he most certainly did believe in approved miracles involving the Eucharist, the Blessed Virgin Mary, and the saints. Hence his criticism here is motivated, not by a naturalistic skepticism toward the supernatural, but, quite to the contrary, by a genuine zeal for the truth of his faith.
It was during this phase of his life that More appears to have first met Antonio Bonvisi, arguably the closest of his friends. The son of a prosperous, centuries-old family from the Italian city of Lucca, Bonvisi was born in December 1487, inheriting a career in banking and the merchant trade from his ancestors. It is probable that More first became acquainted with the young Italian merchant, some nine years his junior….
More and Antonio Bonvisi shared a common enthusiasm for the scholarship of Christian humanism; … for it was through a conversation with Bonvisi that he (More) came to a vastly deepened understanding of papal primacy, as we shall later see.
George H. Kubeck, P.O. Box 865, Stanton, Ca. 90680-9998
In pursuit of the truth – cinops be gone – Monday, January 26, 2009
More’s Early Years - 7 p. 48 – 51
The newly married couple first took up residence in a part of London known as Bucklersbury; here More was to reside for nearly 20 years, and it was here that all four of his children were born: Margaret (c. 1505-1544), Elizabeth (c. 1507 - ?), Cecily (c. 1507 - ?), and John (c. 1508/09-1547).
Father Bouge says that More was his parishioner while in London and that he had baptized two of More’s children. He was also More’s spiritual director, probably from 1508 to 1510, and thus was in a unique position to assess the state of the soul entrusted to him:
This Mr. More was my ghostly child: in his confession to be so pure, so clean, with great study, deliberation, and devotion, I never heard many such” a gentleman of great learning, both in law, art, and divinity, having no man like him now alive of a layman. Item, a gentleman of great soberness and gravity, one chief of the King’s Council, Item, a gentleman of little refection and marvelous diet.
More’s scholarship from these years: the translation into Latin of several of the Greek works of Lucian. He and Erasmus collaborated on these translations, and the fruit of their labors entitled Luciani Opuscala … ah Erasmo Toterodamo et Thoma Mora, was published in Paris in November 1506.
More begins by defending the value of reading the classical works of pagan writers such as Lucian, for valid lessons may be derived from these authors that can be applied within a Christian context. Thus Lucian’s dialogue “Philopseudes”, he notes, teaches us the pitfalls of mixing superstition with religion; similarly Christianity is done a grave disservice by those who embellish the lives of the saint with unfounded and fantastic tales:
…{T}hey have not scrupled to stain with fiction that religion which was founded by {T}ruth {Himself} and ought to consist of naked truth. They have failed to see that such fables are so far from aiding religion that nothing can be more injurious to it. It is obvious, as St. Augustine himself has observed that where there is any scent of a lie, the authority of truth is immediately weakened and destroyed…
More’s words above should not be misunderstood as somehow constituting a rejection on his part of all reported miracles other than those contained in Sacred Scripture. We will later see from his own writings elsewhere that he most certainly did believe in approved miracles involving the Eucharist, the Blessed Virgin Mary, and the saints. Hence his criticism here is motivated, not by a naturalistic skepticism toward the supernatural, but, quite to the contrary, by a genuine zeal for the truth of his faith.
It was during this phase of his life that More appears to have first met Antonio Bonvisi, arguably the closest of his friends. The son of a prosperous, centuries-old family from the Italian city of Lucca, Bonvisi was born in December 1487, inheriting a career in banking and the merchant trade from his ancestors. It is probable that More first became acquainted with the young Italian merchant, some nine years his junior….
More and Antonio Bonvisi shared a common enthusiasm for the scholarship of Christian humanism; … for it was through a conversation with Bonvisi that he (More) came to a vastly deepened understanding of papal primacy, as we shall later see.
George H. Kubeck, P.O. Box 865, Stanton, Ca. 90680-9998
Sunday, January 25, 2009
Trust -Freedom - Socialism - Free Enterprise
Trust – Freedom – Socialism – Free Enterprise
In pursuit of the truth – cinops be gone – Sunday, January 25, 2009
Let’s have some plain talk. The key word is trust, Mr. President. During this past week you made a few decisions that question your judgment. We want to trust you in your decision making. We want transparency and openness and that is what you will be judged on for the next two years. Elections are again in 2010.
First of all, you must get rid of advisors brainwashed with the George Soros Hate-Bush propaganda machine. The election is over. They need to vomit all this from the stomach of their minds. Be wary of your own left-wing intellectual perspective. Law professors invariably live in a world of their own.
The idea of promoting abortion throughout the world and using our tax-payer money is immoral. The Muslim nations think we are depraved. There are Catholic nations throughout the world who believe that you are forcing them into legalized abortion. Within our nation you are dividing and annoying faith believing families who voted for you. As a nation you are dividing us.
Also any terrorist has a mind sickness. When we have dogs with rabies roaming any city; what do we do? We would shoot them. These terrorists were caught on the battlefield with no uniforms on. In a state of war, the Geneva Convention permits us to shoot them. We did not shoot them. However, 9/11 has taught us that we are in a state of war with international terrorists.
Because of their religion, these men are a special kind of terrorists. In Iraq and other countries like Algeria, they blow up their own religious people. Should we bring them to any jails on our shores, these terrorists would be like preachers in our prisons infecting other prisoners with their sick minds?
In this past election, you received almost 90% of the Muslim American vote. (This I do not understand because President Bush freed Iraq from a ruthless tyrant.) For the sake of the authentic Muslim religion, please keep the terrorists in Guantanomo Bay. These terrorists need to be defrocked from their own religion.
Also, in America, we do not want National Socialism whether it is of the Hitler, Mussolini or Stalin type. Our prosperity past and present is due to our free enterprise system. Government is responsible for the economic mess we are in. The influence of a corrupt Wall Street and politicians did not help. Members of your own political party; CINOP Chris Dodd and Bernie Frank made bad decisions.
I notice that in your stimulus package you are doling out money to persons who do not pay any state or federal income tax. That’s called pay-off welfare payments and that is wrong. Just come up with a program that renews confidence in the private free enterprise sector and is transparent and honest.
As a lawyer you must be aware that bills like “Freedom of Choice Act”, “Hate Crime Law” (Really Thought Crime Law), and ENDA (Employment Non-Discrimination Act) are a pain in the neck for ordinary people of faith. They are fundamentally unconstitutional with religious discrimination. These agenda items create anger & disappointment in the people of faith who voted for you. I did not.
George H. Kubeck
In pursuit of the truth – cinops be gone – Sunday, January 25, 2009
Let’s have some plain talk. The key word is trust, Mr. President. During this past week you made a few decisions that question your judgment. We want to trust you in your decision making. We want transparency and openness and that is what you will be judged on for the next two years. Elections are again in 2010.
First of all, you must get rid of advisors brainwashed with the George Soros Hate-Bush propaganda machine. The election is over. They need to vomit all this from the stomach of their minds. Be wary of your own left-wing intellectual perspective. Law professors invariably live in a world of their own.
The idea of promoting abortion throughout the world and using our tax-payer money is immoral. The Muslim nations think we are depraved. There are Catholic nations throughout the world who believe that you are forcing them into legalized abortion. Within our nation you are dividing and annoying faith believing families who voted for you. As a nation you are dividing us.
Also any terrorist has a mind sickness. When we have dogs with rabies roaming any city; what do we do? We would shoot them. These terrorists were caught on the battlefield with no uniforms on. In a state of war, the Geneva Convention permits us to shoot them. We did not shoot them. However, 9/11 has taught us that we are in a state of war with international terrorists.
Because of their religion, these men are a special kind of terrorists. In Iraq and other countries like Algeria, they blow up their own religious people. Should we bring them to any jails on our shores, these terrorists would be like preachers in our prisons infecting other prisoners with their sick minds?
In this past election, you received almost 90% of the Muslim American vote. (This I do not understand because President Bush freed Iraq from a ruthless tyrant.) For the sake of the authentic Muslim religion, please keep the terrorists in Guantanomo Bay. These terrorists need to be defrocked from their own religion.
Also, in America, we do not want National Socialism whether it is of the Hitler, Mussolini or Stalin type. Our prosperity past and present is due to our free enterprise system. Government is responsible for the economic mess we are in. The influence of a corrupt Wall Street and politicians did not help. Members of your own political party; CINOP Chris Dodd and Bernie Frank made bad decisions.
I notice that in your stimulus package you are doling out money to persons who do not pay any state or federal income tax. That’s called pay-off welfare payments and that is wrong. Just come up with a program that renews confidence in the private free enterprise sector and is transparent and honest.
As a lawyer you must be aware that bills like “Freedom of Choice Act”, “Hate Crime Law” (Really Thought Crime Law), and ENDA (Employment Non-Discrimination Act) are a pain in the neck for ordinary people of faith. They are fundamentally unconstitutional with religious discrimination. These agenda items create anger & disappointment in the people of faith who voted for you. I did not.
George H. Kubeck
Saturday, January 24, 2009
California in the Twilight Zone
California in the Twilight Zone
In the pursuit of the truth – cinops be gone – Saturday, January 24, 2009
The following are excerpts from three different stories. They are very disturbing.
1.) The first one is from San Francisco by Kathleen Gilbert. It is dated Jan. 16th, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) – A San Francisco assessor has called for the Catholic Archdiocese of San Francisco to hand over $15 million in taxes because of an internal restructuring of the archdiocese, a move that some are describing as a “retaliation” for the Church’s opposition to Prop. 8.
The Excerpt:
DURING THE MAYOR’S PRAYER BREAKFAST LAST YEAR, WHICH WAS ATTENDED BY ARCHBISHOP NIEDERAUER, CINOP MAYOR GAVIN NEWSON LAMBASTED THE CATHOLIC CHURCH AND THE ARCHDIOCESE FOR THEIR SUPPORT FOR PROPOSTION 8, THE CROWD REPORTEDLY RESPONDED WITH A STANDING OVATION – MINUS THE ARCHBISHOP AND A HANDFUL OF OTHER RELIGIOUS LEADERS.
+++++
2.) This second story is from MEDIA ADVISORY, Tuesday, Jan. 13, 2009
Re: CALIF. LABOR UNIONS UNITE TO FIGHT PROP. 8
The Excerpt:
Oakland, Calif. --- A coalition of more than 50 California labor organizations, including United Healthcare Workers (UHW) and the California Labor Federation, will file an amicus brief on Friday in support of the three lawsuits now challenging Proposition 8, the 2008 ballot initiative that added a same-sex marriage ban to the California state constitution. The labor organizations represent more than two million working men and women in Calif.
+++++
3.) This third story is CATHOLIC CO-SPONSORS OF “FOCA” on our blog dated Sunday, Nov. 2, 2008.
The Excerpt
“FREEDOM OF CHOICE ACT” TO BE SIGNED BY BARACK OBAMA:
THE CALIFORNIA CATHOLIC COSPONSORS OF “FOCA” IN CONGRESS ARE: REP. LORETTA SANCHEZ AND LINDA SANCHEZ, ANNA G, ESHOO, HILDA SOLIS, MIKE THOMPSON, ELLEN O. TAUSCHER, DIANE E. WATSON, GEORGE MILLER AND GRACE NAPOLITANA.
++++++++++++++++
If you care to resolve the above in a careful studied and rational manner, you have three choices: 1) Respond to this blog with your comments. 2) Mail or fax this letter to the Bishops in California. Check our blog for the letter dated November 15, 2008 titled, “Catholic Prayer Breakfast & Home Addresses of Bishops. 3) Mark your calendar for Thurs. Jan. 29th, 7-9 P.M.: Join our St. Thomas More Study Group @ Haskett Library – 2650 W. Broadway, Anaheim, Ca. 92894.
George H. Kubeck, P.O. Box 865, Stanton, Ca. 90680-9998
In the pursuit of the truth – cinops be gone – Saturday, January 24, 2009
The following are excerpts from three different stories. They are very disturbing.
1.) The first one is from San Francisco by Kathleen Gilbert. It is dated Jan. 16th, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) – A San Francisco assessor has called for the Catholic Archdiocese of San Francisco to hand over $15 million in taxes because of an internal restructuring of the archdiocese, a move that some are describing as a “retaliation” for the Church’s opposition to Prop. 8.
The Excerpt:
DURING THE MAYOR’S PRAYER BREAKFAST LAST YEAR, WHICH WAS ATTENDED BY ARCHBISHOP NIEDERAUER, CINOP MAYOR GAVIN NEWSON LAMBASTED THE CATHOLIC CHURCH AND THE ARCHDIOCESE FOR THEIR SUPPORT FOR PROPOSTION 8, THE CROWD REPORTEDLY RESPONDED WITH A STANDING OVATION – MINUS THE ARCHBISHOP AND A HANDFUL OF OTHER RELIGIOUS LEADERS.
+++++
2.) This second story is from MEDIA ADVISORY, Tuesday, Jan. 13, 2009
Re: CALIF. LABOR UNIONS UNITE TO FIGHT PROP. 8
The Excerpt:
Oakland, Calif. --- A coalition of more than 50 California labor organizations, including United Healthcare Workers (UHW) and the California Labor Federation, will file an amicus brief on Friday in support of the three lawsuits now challenging Proposition 8, the 2008 ballot initiative that added a same-sex marriage ban to the California state constitution. The labor organizations represent more than two million working men and women in Calif.
+++++
3.) This third story is CATHOLIC CO-SPONSORS OF “FOCA” on our blog dated Sunday, Nov. 2, 2008.
The Excerpt
“FREEDOM OF CHOICE ACT” TO BE SIGNED BY BARACK OBAMA:
THE CALIFORNIA CATHOLIC COSPONSORS OF “FOCA” IN CONGRESS ARE: REP. LORETTA SANCHEZ AND LINDA SANCHEZ, ANNA G, ESHOO, HILDA SOLIS, MIKE THOMPSON, ELLEN O. TAUSCHER, DIANE E. WATSON, GEORGE MILLER AND GRACE NAPOLITANA.
++++++++++++++++
If you care to resolve the above in a careful studied and rational manner, you have three choices: 1) Respond to this blog with your comments. 2) Mail or fax this letter to the Bishops in California. Check our blog for the letter dated November 15, 2008 titled, “Catholic Prayer Breakfast & Home Addresses of Bishops. 3) Mark your calendar for Thurs. Jan. 29th, 7-9 P.M.: Join our St. Thomas More Study Group @ Haskett Library – 2650 W. Broadway, Anaheim, Ca. 92894.
George H. Kubeck, P.O. Box 865, Stanton, Ca. 90680-9998
Friday, January 23, 2009
A Man for All Seasons - 3 of 3
A Man for All Seasons – 3 of 3
In spirit of the truth – cinops be gone – Friday, January 23, 2009
Let’s get directly to Archbishop Chaput, Render Unto Caesar, and the chapter 5, “A Man for All Season.” How can one explain the judgment of Cuomo?
Cuomo concluded that the common good is best served by legalized abortion. He felt that outlawing abortion would be a greater evil. He said that even cutting off state funding for abortion would be UNJUST.
This Is not the Catholic position. Cuomo as patron saint of Catholic-in-name-only politicians is covering up for the Democratic Party. He is an enabler for the Democratic party and uses twisted Catholic thinking.
First, abortion is not mainly a religious issue but a matter of human rights – in this case, the conceived child’s right to life. Second, abortion is never a private matter. It always had social consequences because someone – the unborn child – always dies, often with mental and physical side effects for the mother. Third, the logic of the Cuomo approach breaks down in practice.
Now, let’s go to Robert Casey Sr. Pennsylvania’s governor from 1987 until 1995. He was a follower of St. Thomas More.
Casey took great pride in being a Democrat. He believed in his party throughout his life. But he also felt that Democrats could no longer honestly speak for the weak and poor if they refused to reopen their circle of compassion to include the unborn.
In his own University of Notre Dame address in 1995, Casey weighed the results of abortion on demand:
“It was sold to America, this idea, as a kind of social cure, a resolution. Instead, it has left us wounded and divided. We were promised it would broaden the circle of freedom. Instead, it has narrowed the circle of freedom. We were told the whole matter was settled and would soon pass from our minds. Twenty years later, it tears at our souls. And so, it is for me the bitterest of ironies that abortion on demand found refuge, found a home – and it pains me to say this – found a home in the National Democratic Party. My party, the party of the weak, the party of the powerless.
You see, to me, protecting the unborn child follows naturally from everything I know about my party and about my country. Nothing could be more foreign to the American experience than legalized abortion. It is inconsistent with our national character, with our national purpose, with all that we’ve done, and with everything we hope to be.”
NOW LET’S FOCUS ON CASEY SON, Robert Casey Jr. He is no chip off the old block. He is a phony pro-life Democratic Senator from Pennsylvania. He got elected with all the pro-abortion voters in Pennsylvania in 2006.
We come now to Ron Emmanuel who with Senator Schumer masterminded the 2006 elections. They got some help from CINOP Nancy Pelosi who blocked a Proposition 8 vote on marriage in Massachusetts from being on the ballot for 2008. Also certain Catholic groups who are peddlers for any CINOP.
They conspired to run so-called Democratic pro-life candidates against the pro-life Republicans in Pennsylvania and other states. And they succeeded. Rick Santorium was the outstanding Catholic pro-life Senator from Pennsylvania. Emmanuel and Schumer and others blocked to have anyone seriously oppose Robert Casey Jr. in the Democratic primary for senator. After all Casey Jr. has his father’s reputation and that got him elected for senator.
Ron Emmanuel is ruthless; and is now President Obama’s chief of staff.
George H. Kubeck
In spirit of the truth – cinops be gone – Friday, January 23, 2009
Let’s get directly to Archbishop Chaput, Render Unto Caesar, and the chapter 5, “A Man for All Season.” How can one explain the judgment of Cuomo?
Cuomo concluded that the common good is best served by legalized abortion. He felt that outlawing abortion would be a greater evil. He said that even cutting off state funding for abortion would be UNJUST.
This Is not the Catholic position. Cuomo as patron saint of Catholic-in-name-only politicians is covering up for the Democratic Party. He is an enabler for the Democratic party and uses twisted Catholic thinking.
First, abortion is not mainly a religious issue but a matter of human rights – in this case, the conceived child’s right to life. Second, abortion is never a private matter. It always had social consequences because someone – the unborn child – always dies, often with mental and physical side effects for the mother. Third, the logic of the Cuomo approach breaks down in practice.
Now, let’s go to Robert Casey Sr. Pennsylvania’s governor from 1987 until 1995. He was a follower of St. Thomas More.
Casey took great pride in being a Democrat. He believed in his party throughout his life. But he also felt that Democrats could no longer honestly speak for the weak and poor if they refused to reopen their circle of compassion to include the unborn.
In his own University of Notre Dame address in 1995, Casey weighed the results of abortion on demand:
“It was sold to America, this idea, as a kind of social cure, a resolution. Instead, it has left us wounded and divided. We were promised it would broaden the circle of freedom. Instead, it has narrowed the circle of freedom. We were told the whole matter was settled and would soon pass from our minds. Twenty years later, it tears at our souls. And so, it is for me the bitterest of ironies that abortion on demand found refuge, found a home – and it pains me to say this – found a home in the National Democratic Party. My party, the party of the weak, the party of the powerless.
You see, to me, protecting the unborn child follows naturally from everything I know about my party and about my country. Nothing could be more foreign to the American experience than legalized abortion. It is inconsistent with our national character, with our national purpose, with all that we’ve done, and with everything we hope to be.”
NOW LET’S FOCUS ON CASEY SON, Robert Casey Jr. He is no chip off the old block. He is a phony pro-life Democratic Senator from Pennsylvania. He got elected with all the pro-abortion voters in Pennsylvania in 2006.
We come now to Ron Emmanuel who with Senator Schumer masterminded the 2006 elections. They got some help from CINOP Nancy Pelosi who blocked a Proposition 8 vote on marriage in Massachusetts from being on the ballot for 2008. Also certain Catholic groups who are peddlers for any CINOP.
They conspired to run so-called Democratic pro-life candidates against the pro-life Republicans in Pennsylvania and other states. And they succeeded. Rick Santorium was the outstanding Catholic pro-life Senator from Pennsylvania. Emmanuel and Schumer and others blocked to have anyone seriously oppose Robert Casey Jr. in the Democratic primary for senator. After all Casey Jr. has his father’s reputation and that got him elected for senator.
Ron Emmanuel is ruthless; and is now President Obama’s chief of staff.
George H. Kubeck
Thursday, January 22, 2009
Common Sense on Change - 2 of 2
Common Sense on Change - 2 of 2
In pursuit of the truth – cinops be gone - Thursday, January 22, 2009
This is the conclusion of the article. I do not know who wrote it
Based on my experiences over these last 5 years of being involved with our group in this fight against abortion and my knowledge of Change Analysis I have concluded that the approval of the Pill and the expanded acceptance of contraception is really the root cause of the explosion of abortion over the last 35 years in our country.
I am not the one that believes this. For the next few minutes I will read quotes from Catholic Authorities linking abortion to contraception. See my 3rd list.
Third list: Quotes from Catholic Authorities Linking Abortion to Contraception:
We have heard from both clergy and lay leaders that overcoming contraception is key to overcoming abortion. Rather than pinning our hopes primarily on overturning Roe v. Wade and other political action, it may be time for Catholics to take control of their destiny.
We can do this by educating our younger generation to resist the trappings of contraception and abortion. This can be accomplished by training older teens and young adults to understand John Paul II’s Theology of the Body, and training couples planning for Marriage in full courses about Natural Family Planning.
Along with others, I have spent time in front of abortion clinics praying and sidewalk counseling. The most heartbreaking situation to see is when married patents come to kill their second child, or their fourth child and have actually brought all their other children in the car with them. Sidewalk counselors have asked many of these parents if they know about NFP (natural family planning) and invariably they have no knowledge of it.
Thank you for your attention.
Anonymous
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Thinking with the Church
Is that still possible? Pope Benedict XVI has a few thoughts:
“The Lord does for us what we cannot do for ourselves. But he does not consign us to idleness; the peace of the Lord requires that we put on the mind of Jesus Christ. If Jesus were to be as visible in our midst as he once was to his disciples, what would he find? (Jan. 18th meditation)
For the Catholic mind, Church is to be understood solely as the community of those who communicate together in the body and in the word of the Lord, and a community of communicants exists, just as does a linguistic community, only if there is unity in the witness of its members.”… (Jan. 19th meditation)
In the witness of public officials who are in support of the Freedom of Choice Act and they call themselves Catholic; what actions should the bishops take?
George H. Kubeck
In pursuit of the truth – cinops be gone - Thursday, January 22, 2009
This is the conclusion of the article. I do not know who wrote it
Based on my experiences over these last 5 years of being involved with our group in this fight against abortion and my knowledge of Change Analysis I have concluded that the approval of the Pill and the expanded acceptance of contraception is really the root cause of the explosion of abortion over the last 35 years in our country.
I am not the one that believes this. For the next few minutes I will read quotes from Catholic Authorities linking abortion to contraception. See my 3rd list.
Third list: Quotes from Catholic Authorities Linking Abortion to Contraception:
We have heard from both clergy and lay leaders that overcoming contraception is key to overcoming abortion. Rather than pinning our hopes primarily on overturning Roe v. Wade and other political action, it may be time for Catholics to take control of their destiny.
We can do this by educating our younger generation to resist the trappings of contraception and abortion. This can be accomplished by training older teens and young adults to understand John Paul II’s Theology of the Body, and training couples planning for Marriage in full courses about Natural Family Planning.
Along with others, I have spent time in front of abortion clinics praying and sidewalk counseling. The most heartbreaking situation to see is when married patents come to kill their second child, or their fourth child and have actually brought all their other children in the car with them. Sidewalk counselors have asked many of these parents if they know about NFP (natural family planning) and invariably they have no knowledge of it.
Thank you for your attention.
Anonymous
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Thinking with the Church
Is that still possible? Pope Benedict XVI has a few thoughts:
“The Lord does for us what we cannot do for ourselves. But he does not consign us to idleness; the peace of the Lord requires that we put on the mind of Jesus Christ. If Jesus were to be as visible in our midst as he once was to his disciples, what would he find? (Jan. 18th meditation)
For the Catholic mind, Church is to be understood solely as the community of those who communicate together in the body and in the word of the Lord, and a community of communicants exists, just as does a linguistic community, only if there is unity in the witness of its members.”… (Jan. 19th meditation)
In the witness of public officials who are in support of the Freedom of Choice Act and they call themselves Catholic; what actions should the bishops take?
George H. Kubeck
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
Common Sense on Change 1 of 2
Common Sense on Change 1 of 2
In pursuit of the truth – cinops be gone – Wednesday, January 21, 2009
I found the following in my pile of papers. Do not know who wrote it.
Good Morning,
One of the topics that I want to talk to you about today is the word “Change”. Our President Elect has been spending a great deal of time talking about change and making it sound that; by definition change is always a good thing. You all have heard of another “ch” word that a lot of people use like it is always a good thing. But is change always good? Let’s take a look at our country’s recent financial crises. They say it has brought about by unregulated Mortgage lending practices.
I remember not too long ago that mortgage practices were pretty well controlled. Someone wanting to buy a house had to go to a bank or savings and loan. You had to put down 20% down. You had to have a job where your income could be enough to readily cover the mortgage payments. You had to have a good credit rating and the house had to owner occupied.
But all of a sudden, here we were with NINJA loans. No income; No Job; No Assets: No Problem. And mortgage brokers had set up shop on every street corner. Our mortgage lending practices had changed and the result has been disastrous. For 35 years we have been fighting against disastrous change in our society; Legalize Abortion.
There is a method of looking for the cause of a problem. It’s called Change Analysis. It requires a detailed investigation of all changes that might be related to the problem. These changes would have had to occur between a time when the problem was known not to exist until the time that the problem was found to exist. Now our problem is the legalization of Abortion in 1973. Let’s look at all changes that occurred in the 20th century before 1973 that might be related to legalizing abortion. My first list shows these changes. All of them have some significance but there is only time to mention some of them.
First List: Changes in the 20th Century leading to abortion:
Now let’s look back to the 1950’s; it was the last decade in which we know that legalized abortion did not exist and a time when respect for pre-born life was the norm for society. 1) Contraceptives were not sold off the shelf. 2) T.V. programs were not sexually oriented. 3) Public schools did not teach sex education. 4) Cohabitation was almost non-existent. 5) Unmarried Catholic couples realized hat a shotgun wedding would be expected if a premarital pregnancy occurred.
Let’s look at my 2nd list which is titled Cultural Degradation: 1950’ to 2000’s
Let’s read some of them. (Make up your own list.) ….
These are drastic differences. I don’t believe our country has ever had a record of this magnitude of moral decay through any other time period in our history.
Anonymous:
In pursuit of the truth – cinops be gone – Wednesday, January 21, 2009
I found the following in my pile of papers. Do not know who wrote it.
Good Morning,
One of the topics that I want to talk to you about today is the word “Change”. Our President Elect has been spending a great deal of time talking about change and making it sound that; by definition change is always a good thing. You all have heard of another “ch” word that a lot of people use like it is always a good thing. But is change always good? Let’s take a look at our country’s recent financial crises. They say it has brought about by unregulated Mortgage lending practices.
I remember not too long ago that mortgage practices were pretty well controlled. Someone wanting to buy a house had to go to a bank or savings and loan. You had to put down 20% down. You had to have a job where your income could be enough to readily cover the mortgage payments. You had to have a good credit rating and the house had to owner occupied.
But all of a sudden, here we were with NINJA loans. No income; No Job; No Assets: No Problem. And mortgage brokers had set up shop on every street corner. Our mortgage lending practices had changed and the result has been disastrous. For 35 years we have been fighting against disastrous change in our society; Legalize Abortion.
There is a method of looking for the cause of a problem. It’s called Change Analysis. It requires a detailed investigation of all changes that might be related to the problem. These changes would have had to occur between a time when the problem was known not to exist until the time that the problem was found to exist. Now our problem is the legalization of Abortion in 1973. Let’s look at all changes that occurred in the 20th century before 1973 that might be related to legalizing abortion. My first list shows these changes. All of them have some significance but there is only time to mention some of them.
First List: Changes in the 20th Century leading to abortion:
Now let’s look back to the 1950’s; it was the last decade in which we know that legalized abortion did not exist and a time when respect for pre-born life was the norm for society. 1) Contraceptives were not sold off the shelf. 2) T.V. programs were not sexually oriented. 3) Public schools did not teach sex education. 4) Cohabitation was almost non-existent. 5) Unmarried Catholic couples realized hat a shotgun wedding would be expected if a premarital pregnancy occurred.
Let’s look at my 2nd list which is titled Cultural Degradation: 1950’ to 2000’s
Let’s read some of them. (Make up your own list.) ….
These are drastic differences. I don’t believe our country has ever had a record of this magnitude of moral decay through any other time period in our history.
Anonymous:
Monday, January 19, 2009
THIS EXCITING WEEK *
This Exciting Week *
In pursuit of the truth – cinops be gone – Monday, January 19, 2009
1,) NATIONAL PRAYER VIGIL FOR LIFE AT NATIONAL SHRINE – WED., JAN. 21st
Over 16,000 worshipers – many of them youth from schools around the nation – are expected to attend the opening Mass and all-night Vigil, in the Basilica of the National Shrine of Immaculate Conception. They will pray for an end to abortion. Vigil Mass for Life will begin at 4 P.M. (Pacific Time). 2-3 hrs.
The date marks the eve of the 36th anniversary of Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision legalizing abortion.
2,) MARCH FOR LIFE 2009 (LIVE) – WASHINGTON, D.C. 4 HRS. – THURS. JAN. 22
You will see live and complete coverage of the most important pro-life event of the year: the 2008 March for Life. This prayerful walking procession up Constitution Avenue in Washington DC ends with a Rally for Life at the Washington Monument. EWTN network coverage includes interviews, panel discussions, and speeches from pro-lifers around the country.
EWTN: 8 A.M. (PACIFIC TIME) – EVENING REPEAT @ 7 P.M. (PACIF. TIME)
REPEATED: SAT. 6 A.M. (PACIFIC TIME)
Christendom College Students to Carry Lead Banner in March for Life.
The entire student body of Christendom College including many of the faculty and staff will lead hundreds of thousands in protesting abortion.
The theme of this years march is “ REMEMBER – the Life Principles mean Equal Care with No Exceptions!” The March’s website states that “the Life Principles focus on the fact that each human life begins at fertilization by any means, and society must provide equal care for the right to life of each born and preborn human. The Life Principles are based on our secular homicide laws.”
ALL OF THE ABOVE WILL BE ON EWTN. HAVE A FRIEND TAPE IT FOR YOU
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
3,) In Orange County, our Bishop Todd Brown invites our Catholic community as well as all people of good will to join together, Thurs. Jan. 22nd, for a day of fasting, prayer and works of charity in our desire to restore a culture of life and a civilization of love to his country.
Bishop Dominic Luong will preside this day at an Evening Prayer to End Abortion at Holy Family Cathedral (566 South Glassell St., Orange, Ca. – 714-639-2900) @ 7 P.M. A reception will be held in the Parish Hall afterwards.
There are also various spiritual activities on Saturday Morning, Jan. 24th including attending Mass and praying at an abortion or Planned Parenthood site.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
4.) The inauguration of President-elect Barack Obama on Tues., Jan. 20th
*5.) CHANGE OF DATE: FROM THURS. JAN. 22ND TO THURS. JAN 29TH FOR “THOMAS MORE STUDY GROUP.” MARK YOUR CALENDAR FOR 7-9 PM. @ HASKETT LIBRARY – 2650 W. BROADWAY, ANAHEIM, CA.
George H. Kubeck
In pursuit of the truth – cinops be gone – Monday, January 19, 2009
1,) NATIONAL PRAYER VIGIL FOR LIFE AT NATIONAL SHRINE – WED., JAN. 21st
Over 16,000 worshipers – many of them youth from schools around the nation – are expected to attend the opening Mass and all-night Vigil, in the Basilica of the National Shrine of Immaculate Conception. They will pray for an end to abortion. Vigil Mass for Life will begin at 4 P.M. (Pacific Time). 2-3 hrs.
The date marks the eve of the 36th anniversary of Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision legalizing abortion.
2,) MARCH FOR LIFE 2009 (LIVE) – WASHINGTON, D.C. 4 HRS. – THURS. JAN. 22
You will see live and complete coverage of the most important pro-life event of the year: the 2008 March for Life. This prayerful walking procession up Constitution Avenue in Washington DC ends with a Rally for Life at the Washington Monument. EWTN network coverage includes interviews, panel discussions, and speeches from pro-lifers around the country.
EWTN: 8 A.M. (PACIFIC TIME) – EVENING REPEAT @ 7 P.M. (PACIF. TIME)
REPEATED: SAT. 6 A.M. (PACIFIC TIME)
Christendom College Students to Carry Lead Banner in March for Life.
The entire student body of Christendom College including many of the faculty and staff will lead hundreds of thousands in protesting abortion.
The theme of this years march is “ REMEMBER – the Life Principles mean Equal Care with No Exceptions!” The March’s website states that “the Life Principles focus on the fact that each human life begins at fertilization by any means, and society must provide equal care for the right to life of each born and preborn human. The Life Principles are based on our secular homicide laws.”
ALL OF THE ABOVE WILL BE ON EWTN. HAVE A FRIEND TAPE IT FOR YOU
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
3,) In Orange County, our Bishop Todd Brown invites our Catholic community as well as all people of good will to join together, Thurs. Jan. 22nd, for a day of fasting, prayer and works of charity in our desire to restore a culture of life and a civilization of love to his country.
Bishop Dominic Luong will preside this day at an Evening Prayer to End Abortion at Holy Family Cathedral (566 South Glassell St., Orange, Ca. – 714-639-2900) @ 7 P.M. A reception will be held in the Parish Hall afterwards.
There are also various spiritual activities on Saturday Morning, Jan. 24th including attending Mass and praying at an abortion or Planned Parenthood site.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
4.) The inauguration of President-elect Barack Obama on Tues., Jan. 20th
*5.) CHANGE OF DATE: FROM THURS. JAN. 22ND TO THURS. JAN 29TH FOR “THOMAS MORE STUDY GROUP.” MARK YOUR CALENDAR FOR 7-9 PM. @ HASKETT LIBRARY – 2650 W. BROADWAY, ANAHEIM, CA.
George H. Kubeck
Sunday, January 18, 2009
A Man for All Seasons - 2 of 3
A Man for All Seasons – 2 of 3
In pursuit of the truth – cinops be gone – Sunday, January 18, 2009
This relentless pursuit of the Truth: St. Thomas More exuberated the truth; one of our several Founding Fathers, Alexander Hamilton pursued it; and the recently deceased Father Richard John Neuhaus lived it.
Neuhaus became intimately involved in the pro-life movement after the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision, Jan. 22, 1973, and helped to unite pro-life advocates in both Catholic and Protestant circles. He continued as an intellectual heavyweight – founded the journal First Things in 1990 – and became even more well-known for his advising President George W. Bush on pro-life matters. His influence was so great on the president that his catch-phrase of “welcoming unborn children into life and protecting them under law” became Bush’s standard line any time he referenced pro-life matters. Today the President had a full text proclamation as “National Sanctity of Life Day – Sunday, January 18, 2009.”
Now in pursuit of the truth we have a problem with our U.S. Media. We have advocacy journalism. Their agenda is for a Secular America. Same-sex marriage is their immediate goal.
Historical examples of advocacy journalism were in Nazi Germany and Communist Russia. TODAY, The New York Times is the mouthpiece for Secular America. This newspaper just loves, protects and promotes any Catholic-in-name-only politician. Americans deserve fair and honest news reporting.
A blatant example of total news blackout and censorship is pro-life’s work on the Freedom of Choice Act post cards to Senators and members of Congress. The tentative Freedom of Choice Law is absolutely un-constitutional. Political correctness does not allow any discussion of this matter. Why should we continue to put up with this stupid political correctiness in this matter?
Now let’s get back to Archbishop Chaput’s book, Render Unto Caesar, chapter 5, “A Man for All Season.” In my judgment, President John F. Kennedy and Governor Mario Cuomo can’t stand in the shadow of St. Thomas More. The Governor is still alive and possibly the Archbishop’s kind comments will be a spiritual awakening for Mario Cuomo. I know Cuomo soothes his conscience by having vetoed as Governor of New York death penalty laws 12 times. The death penalty is not even a drop in the buckets of the blood shed by the killing of the unborn innocent babies.
I wonder if Governor Mario Cuomo has spoken out on the “Freedom of Choice Act,” or comment on the following section on p. 57 of Chaput’s book.
In 2004, another archbishop, Raymond Burke of St. Louis, drew national headlines. In his final weeks as bishop of La Crosse, Wisconsin, he asked three Catholic public figures from presenting themselves from Communion. He then asked his priests to withhold Communion from Catholic public officials who supported abortion rights. The three offending politicians claimed merely to be pro-choice.
In Burke’s view, though, their actions showed a material support for abortion and a stubborn disregard for their own faith. All three had voted for or otherwise supported forcing Catholic hospitals to provide abortions. In effect, they had publicly tried to coerce the church to violate her teaching on a serious sanctity-of-life issue.
George H. Kubeck
In pursuit of the truth – cinops be gone – Sunday, January 18, 2009
This relentless pursuit of the Truth: St. Thomas More exuberated the truth; one of our several Founding Fathers, Alexander Hamilton pursued it; and the recently deceased Father Richard John Neuhaus lived it.
Neuhaus became intimately involved in the pro-life movement after the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision, Jan. 22, 1973, and helped to unite pro-life advocates in both Catholic and Protestant circles. He continued as an intellectual heavyweight – founded the journal First Things in 1990 – and became even more well-known for his advising President George W. Bush on pro-life matters. His influence was so great on the president that his catch-phrase of “welcoming unborn children into life and protecting them under law” became Bush’s standard line any time he referenced pro-life matters. Today the President had a full text proclamation as “National Sanctity of Life Day – Sunday, January 18, 2009.”
Now in pursuit of the truth we have a problem with our U.S. Media. We have advocacy journalism. Their agenda is for a Secular America. Same-sex marriage is their immediate goal.
Historical examples of advocacy journalism were in Nazi Germany and Communist Russia. TODAY, The New York Times is the mouthpiece for Secular America. This newspaper just loves, protects and promotes any Catholic-in-name-only politician. Americans deserve fair and honest news reporting.
A blatant example of total news blackout and censorship is pro-life’s work on the Freedom of Choice Act post cards to Senators and members of Congress. The tentative Freedom of Choice Law is absolutely un-constitutional. Political correctness does not allow any discussion of this matter. Why should we continue to put up with this stupid political correctiness in this matter?
Now let’s get back to Archbishop Chaput’s book, Render Unto Caesar, chapter 5, “A Man for All Season.” In my judgment, President John F. Kennedy and Governor Mario Cuomo can’t stand in the shadow of St. Thomas More. The Governor is still alive and possibly the Archbishop’s kind comments will be a spiritual awakening for Mario Cuomo. I know Cuomo soothes his conscience by having vetoed as Governor of New York death penalty laws 12 times. The death penalty is not even a drop in the buckets of the blood shed by the killing of the unborn innocent babies.
I wonder if Governor Mario Cuomo has spoken out on the “Freedom of Choice Act,” or comment on the following section on p. 57 of Chaput’s book.
In 2004, another archbishop, Raymond Burke of St. Louis, drew national headlines. In his final weeks as bishop of La Crosse, Wisconsin, he asked three Catholic public figures from presenting themselves from Communion. He then asked his priests to withhold Communion from Catholic public officials who supported abortion rights. The three offending politicians claimed merely to be pro-choice.
In Burke’s view, though, their actions showed a material support for abortion and a stubborn disregard for their own faith. All three had voted for or otherwise supported forcing Catholic hospitals to provide abortions. In effect, they had publicly tried to coerce the church to violate her teaching on a serious sanctity-of-life issue.
George H. Kubeck
Saturday, January 17, 2009
A Man for All Seasons - 1 of 2
A Man for All Seasons – 1 of 2
In pursuit of the truth – cinops be gone – Saturday, January 17, 2009
The following are excerpts from Archbishop Charles J. Chaput’s book, Render unto Caesar, and Chapter 9 with the above title:
Over the centuries, a great many saints and sinners have shaped the course of society. But the undisputed icon of the Catholic political vocation is the “heavenly patron of statesmen and politicians,” as Pope John Paul II called him in 2000, Saint Thomas More.
Anyone unfamiliar with More’s life can simply watch the 1966 film version of Robert Bolt’s play, A Man for All Seasons! It’s a story of love and betrayal, of service and treachery, of a very human man trying to follow his conscience and the unsavory men responsible for his demise.
More’s appeal springs from the desire we all share to lead a life of conviction, courage and love. More stands as a witness against cowardice. Why did his peers need him to publicly endorse Henry’s divorce from Catherine of Aragon, marriage to Anne Boleyn, and power over the church? Why did anyone care? The answer is character. Then, as now, fidelity to principle was worth more than gold.
He disciplined himself to be a man of piety. His morning prayer and Mass routine, his fasting and hair shirt, have become symbols of his devotion.
The grandson and son of prominent London lawyers, More learned very early the honor in serving one’s nation. More’s studies prepared him for a life of public service, primarily in law. But his education also included the classics: the ancient Greeks, Romans and early church fathers; philosophy, theology, history, and literature. He had a shrewd insight into human nature, political society and the role of law.
Through his private life, More teaches us the beauty of family, friendship, and love. In public life, More teaches us the gravity of politics and use and misuse of state authority. All law, on issues from jaywalking to homicide, is rooted in morality because it codifies what we ought to do. Ought is morally loaded word.
As the former jurist Robert Bork wrote:
"For More, morality was superior to both human law and the will of the sovereign in that it could be used to shape or to alter that law and that will, though not to justify disobedience to it."
More obeyed his conscience because he knew he was obligated to obey God first. He saw that his Catholic formation of conscience depended on everything the Protestant reformers of his day seemed ready to destroy: authority, tradition, and law. More accepted the authority of his king, but he could not accept Henry’s claim to supreme spiritual authority because More knew his duty was to a higher law. His sacrifice was not an act of self-assertion. It was the opposite. It was an act of obedience. Only thus do More’s last words make sense as he neared the
scaffold:
“I die the King’s good servant, but God’s first.:
Given the power of the United States, the witness of Thomas More has value for every Catholic public official, today more than ever. NO DISCORD EXISTS BETWEEN CATHOLIC THOUGHT AND DEMOCRATIC SOCIETY WHEN BOTH ARE PROPERLY UNDERSTOOD.
(P.S. Robert Casey Sr., Pennsylvania’s governor from 1987 -1995 met the challenge of St. Thomas More. Two others didn’t. ghk)
George H. Kubeck
In pursuit of the truth – cinops be gone – Saturday, January 17, 2009
The following are excerpts from Archbishop Charles J. Chaput’s book, Render unto Caesar, and Chapter 9 with the above title:
Over the centuries, a great many saints and sinners have shaped the course of society. But the undisputed icon of the Catholic political vocation is the “heavenly patron of statesmen and politicians,” as Pope John Paul II called him in 2000, Saint Thomas More.
Anyone unfamiliar with More’s life can simply watch the 1966 film version of Robert Bolt’s play, A Man for All Seasons! It’s a story of love and betrayal, of service and treachery, of a very human man trying to follow his conscience and the unsavory men responsible for his demise.
More’s appeal springs from the desire we all share to lead a life of conviction, courage and love. More stands as a witness against cowardice. Why did his peers need him to publicly endorse Henry’s divorce from Catherine of Aragon, marriage to Anne Boleyn, and power over the church? Why did anyone care? The answer is character. Then, as now, fidelity to principle was worth more than gold.
He disciplined himself to be a man of piety. His morning prayer and Mass routine, his fasting and hair shirt, have become symbols of his devotion.
The grandson and son of prominent London lawyers, More learned very early the honor in serving one’s nation. More’s studies prepared him for a life of public service, primarily in law. But his education also included the classics: the ancient Greeks, Romans and early church fathers; philosophy, theology, history, and literature. He had a shrewd insight into human nature, political society and the role of law.
Through his private life, More teaches us the beauty of family, friendship, and love. In public life, More teaches us the gravity of politics and use and misuse of state authority. All law, on issues from jaywalking to homicide, is rooted in morality because it codifies what we ought to do. Ought is morally loaded word.
As the former jurist Robert Bork wrote:
"For More, morality was superior to both human law and the will of the sovereign in that it could be used to shape or to alter that law and that will, though not to justify disobedience to it."
More obeyed his conscience because he knew he was obligated to obey God first. He saw that his Catholic formation of conscience depended on everything the Protestant reformers of his day seemed ready to destroy: authority, tradition, and law. More accepted the authority of his king, but he could not accept Henry’s claim to supreme spiritual authority because More knew his duty was to a higher law. His sacrifice was not an act of self-assertion. It was the opposite. It was an act of obedience. Only thus do More’s last words make sense as he neared the
scaffold:
“I die the King’s good servant, but God’s first.:
Given the power of the United States, the witness of Thomas More has value for every Catholic public official, today more than ever. NO DISCORD EXISTS BETWEEN CATHOLIC THOUGHT AND DEMOCRATIC SOCIETY WHEN BOTH ARE PROPERLY UNDERSTOOD.
(P.S. Robert Casey Sr., Pennsylvania’s governor from 1987 -1995 met the challenge of St. Thomas More. Two others didn’t. ghk)
George H. Kubeck
Good News and Bad News in Mexico
Good News and Bad News in Mexico
In pursuit of the truth – cinops be gone – Saturday, Jan. 17, 2009
Again from LifeSiteNews.com, Wed. and Thurs. Jan .14th and 15th, 2009:
Mexican President Felipe Calderon appeared in person at the opening of the Sixth World Encounter of Families and gave the keynote speech formally inaugurating the conference. Calderon’s decision to associate himself formally with the Encounter sends a clear message of opposition to legalize abortion, euthanasia, homosexual “marriage,” “express divorce,” and other similar policies.
Calderon’s appearance also lends support to Cardinal Archbishop Norberto Rivera Carrera of Mexico City, who has been repeatedly threatened with legal action for opposing the legalization of abortion in the nation’s capital, as well as other goals of anti-family socialists.
“The proliferation of individuals who carry out acts of violence, of crime, of hate, their way of the life sadly coincides to a great extent with the fragmentation and dysfunction that affect the family environment,” said Calderon.
Calderon noted that the FAMILY “is the first and most decisive source for education, it is where cultural, ethical, spiritual, and political values are forged.”
The World Encounter of Families, which is held once every three years, was begun by Pope John Paul II to strengthen the value of the family within the Catholic Church and throughout human society.
President Felipe Calderon is a member of the National Action Party (PAN), which was created in the 1940s to give expression to social ideals supported by Catholics, which avoiding a formal association with the Catholic religion. His election in 2006 followed the election of Vicente Fox to the presidency in 2000, the first such victory in the PAN’s history.
Under Calderon’s leadership the nation’s executive branch launched a significant legal challenge to the legalization of abortion-on-demand in Mexico. However, the court ruled in 2008 that Mexico City’s law was constitutional.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
And now for the bad news: Mexico’s Social Democratic Party (PSD) held a protest outside of the World Encounter of Families conference, denouncing the notion that a natural family consists of a permanent union between a man and woman. This PSD explicit goal is to legalize abortion on the demand, as well as euthanasia, homosexual “marriage,” and the use of recreational drugs.
Lastly, from Newsmax.com, Wed. Jan. 14, 2009:
U.S. Military: Mexico Could Collapse Under Drug Violence
Mexico is in danger of a “rapid and sudden collapse” due to criminal gangs and drug cartels, according to a troubling new report by the U.S. Joint Forces Command on worldwide security threats. “The Mexican possibility may seem less like (than in Pakistan) but the Mexican government, its politicians, police and judicial infrastructure are all under sustained assault and pressure by criminal gangs and drug cartels.”
George H. Kubeck – (PAN is the pro-life, marriage and family party in Mexico.)
In pursuit of the truth – cinops be gone – Saturday, Jan. 17, 2009
Again from LifeSiteNews.com, Wed. and Thurs. Jan .14th and 15th, 2009:
Mexican President Felipe Calderon appeared in person at the opening of the Sixth World Encounter of Families and gave the keynote speech formally inaugurating the conference. Calderon’s decision to associate himself formally with the Encounter sends a clear message of opposition to legalize abortion, euthanasia, homosexual “marriage,” “express divorce,” and other similar policies.
Calderon’s appearance also lends support to Cardinal Archbishop Norberto Rivera Carrera of Mexico City, who has been repeatedly threatened with legal action for opposing the legalization of abortion in the nation’s capital, as well as other goals of anti-family socialists.
“The proliferation of individuals who carry out acts of violence, of crime, of hate, their way of the life sadly coincides to a great extent with the fragmentation and dysfunction that affect the family environment,” said Calderon.
Calderon noted that the FAMILY “is the first and most decisive source for education, it is where cultural, ethical, spiritual, and political values are forged.”
The World Encounter of Families, which is held once every three years, was begun by Pope John Paul II to strengthen the value of the family within the Catholic Church and throughout human society.
President Felipe Calderon is a member of the National Action Party (PAN), which was created in the 1940s to give expression to social ideals supported by Catholics, which avoiding a formal association with the Catholic religion. His election in 2006 followed the election of Vicente Fox to the presidency in 2000, the first such victory in the PAN’s history.
Under Calderon’s leadership the nation’s executive branch launched a significant legal challenge to the legalization of abortion-on-demand in Mexico. However, the court ruled in 2008 that Mexico City’s law was constitutional.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
And now for the bad news: Mexico’s Social Democratic Party (PSD) held a protest outside of the World Encounter of Families conference, denouncing the notion that a natural family consists of a permanent union between a man and woman. This PSD explicit goal is to legalize abortion on the demand, as well as euthanasia, homosexual “marriage,” and the use of recreational drugs.
Lastly, from Newsmax.com, Wed. Jan. 14, 2009:
U.S. Military: Mexico Could Collapse Under Drug Violence
Mexico is in danger of a “rapid and sudden collapse” due to criminal gangs and drug cartels, according to a troubling new report by the U.S. Joint Forces Command on worldwide security threats. “The Mexican possibility may seem less like (than in Pakistan) but the Mexican government, its politicians, police and judicial infrastructure are all under sustained assault and pressure by criminal gangs and drug cartels.”
George H. Kubeck – (PAN is the pro-life, marriage and family party in Mexico.)
Friday, January 16, 2009
MARIO CUOMO - THE CINOP BRAIN - 5 OF 5
MARIO CUOMO – THE CINOP BRAIN – 5 of 5
In pursuit of the truth – cinops be gone – Friday, January 16, 2009
Here is a biographical note on the author of Appendix IV titled The Father of Catholic Excuses – “MARIO CUOMO AT NOTRE DAME” in your next book to read, “Can a Catholic be a Democrat.” Sophia Institute Press, 2006.
A lifelong Democrat, David Carlin was a Rhode Island state senator from 1981 to 1992, serving as senate majority leader in 1989 and 1990. In 1992 he was his district’s Democratic candidate for the U.S. House of Representatives.
For over twenty years he has been a professor of philosophy and sociology at the Community College of Rhode Island.
Carlin’s previous book, The Decline and Fall of the Catholic Church in America, is available from Sophia Institute Press….
# 4 The decency of pro-choicers. Not everyone, Cuomo points out, agrees with the Catholic view of abortion: P. 207-8
And those who don’t – those who endorse legalized abortions – aren’t a ruthless alliance of anti-Christians determined to overthrow our moral standards. In many cases, the proponents of legal abortion are the very people who have worked with Catholics to realize the goals of social justice set out in papal encyclicals: the American Lutheran Church, the Central Conference of American Rabbis, the Presbyterian Church in the United States, B’nai B’rith Women, the Women of the Episcopal Church.
These are just a few of the religious organizations that don’t share the church’s position on abortion.
Only two brief comments are necessary here. One is that the religious organization listed here are all “liberal”: some liberal Christian, others liberal Jewish. And liberal religion, if the argument I made earlier in the book is sound, is an ally of secularism, a fellow-traveler assisting secularism in its opposition to all forms of traditional Christianity, including Catholicism.
The other comment is this: I grant that those who endorse legalized abortion are not “ruthless” and “callous.” For the most part, they’re well-educated, well mannered, upper-middle-class people who make for pleasant company if you happen to find yourself in their midst. But as I’ve argued throughout this book and contrary to what Cuomo told his audience at Notre Dame, THEY DO CONSTITUTE AN “AN ALLIANCE OF ANTI-CHRISTIANS DETERMINED TO OVERTHROW OUR [CATHOLIC] MORAL STANDARDS.” THIS WASN’T AS CLEAR IN 1984 AS IT IS TODAY, BUT IT’S SURPRISING THAT A SHREWD OBSERVER LIKE MARIO CUOMO WOULDN’T HAVE SEEN THIS EVEN THAT EARLY IN THE DAY.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
“It is now time for Mario Cuomo to write or debate his position in the public arena. As the Patron Saint of so-called Catholic pro-choice politicians who have now morphed into pro same-sex marriage, embryonic stem-cell research, and even assisted suicide and euthanasia advocates.
Mario Cuomo, you screwed up the Democratic Party and the Catholic Church in America. You duped the staff at the US. Conference of Catholic Bishops and all the bishops for decades. How can you look yourself in the mirror? You ought to be ashamed of yourself! YOU ARE A COWARD IF YOU DO NOT WRITE OR DEBATE THIS MATTER!” ghk
George H. Kubeck
In pursuit of the truth – cinops be gone – Friday, January 16, 2009
Here is a biographical note on the author of Appendix IV titled The Father of Catholic Excuses – “MARIO CUOMO AT NOTRE DAME” in your next book to read, “Can a Catholic be a Democrat.” Sophia Institute Press, 2006.
A lifelong Democrat, David Carlin was a Rhode Island state senator from 1981 to 1992, serving as senate majority leader in 1989 and 1990. In 1992 he was his district’s Democratic candidate for the U.S. House of Representatives.
For over twenty years he has been a professor of philosophy and sociology at the Community College of Rhode Island.
Carlin’s previous book, The Decline and Fall of the Catholic Church in America, is available from Sophia Institute Press….
# 4 The decency of pro-choicers. Not everyone, Cuomo points out, agrees with the Catholic view of abortion: P. 207-8
And those who don’t – those who endorse legalized abortions – aren’t a ruthless alliance of anti-Christians determined to overthrow our moral standards. In many cases, the proponents of legal abortion are the very people who have worked with Catholics to realize the goals of social justice set out in papal encyclicals: the American Lutheran Church, the Central Conference of American Rabbis, the Presbyterian Church in the United States, B’nai B’rith Women, the Women of the Episcopal Church.
These are just a few of the religious organizations that don’t share the church’s position on abortion.
Only two brief comments are necessary here. One is that the religious organization listed here are all “liberal”: some liberal Christian, others liberal Jewish. And liberal religion, if the argument I made earlier in the book is sound, is an ally of secularism, a fellow-traveler assisting secularism in its opposition to all forms of traditional Christianity, including Catholicism.
The other comment is this: I grant that those who endorse legalized abortion are not “ruthless” and “callous.” For the most part, they’re well-educated, well mannered, upper-middle-class people who make for pleasant company if you happen to find yourself in their midst. But as I’ve argued throughout this book and contrary to what Cuomo told his audience at Notre Dame, THEY DO CONSTITUTE AN “AN ALLIANCE OF ANTI-CHRISTIANS DETERMINED TO OVERTHROW OUR [CATHOLIC] MORAL STANDARDS.” THIS WASN’T AS CLEAR IN 1984 AS IT IS TODAY, BUT IT’S SURPRISING THAT A SHREWD OBSERVER LIKE MARIO CUOMO WOULDN’T HAVE SEEN THIS EVEN THAT EARLY IN THE DAY.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
“It is now time for Mario Cuomo to write or debate his position in the public arena. As the Patron Saint of so-called Catholic pro-choice politicians who have now morphed into pro same-sex marriage, embryonic stem-cell research, and even assisted suicide and euthanasia advocates.
Mario Cuomo, you screwed up the Democratic Party and the Catholic Church in America. You duped the staff at the US. Conference of Catholic Bishops and all the bishops for decades. How can you look yourself in the mirror? You ought to be ashamed of yourself! YOU ARE A COWARD IF YOU DO NOT WRITE OR DEBATE THIS MATTER!” ghk
George H. Kubeck
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
Anxiety and Fear
Anxiety and Fear
In pursuit of the truth – cinops be gone – Wednesday, January 14, 2009
The Jan. 12th entry in Pope Benedict’s book, Co-Workers of the Truth, “Meditations for Every Day,” is appropriate for our times:
What we fear nowadays is the darkness that emanates from man, and in this fear we have finally discovered true darkness – more fearful in this century of man’s inhumanity that could ever have been imagined by the generations that preceded us.
We are afraid that the good in the world will become completely powerless; that eventually it will not longer be meaningful to seek the good in truth, purity, justice, or love because the law of the sharper elbow is now the only law that prevails in the world, because the tendency of the world is to judge in favor of the violent, the brutal and not the saintly.
For we see what rules the world is MONEY, THE ATOM BOMB, THE CYNICISM of those to whom nothing is sacred.
How often we find ourselves fearing that there is, after all, no meaning in the chaotic flurry of this world; ultimately, world history will divide all men into the stupid and the strong. There’s a general feeling that the powers of darkness are on the increase, that the good is powerless – the feeling that assails us when we look at the world is the same feeling that must have once assailed our ancestors in autumn and winter when the sun seemed to be engaged in a death struggle.
Will it survive? Will the good continue to have meaning and power in the world? In the stable at Bethlehem as sign that enables us to answer with a joyous yes! For the Child, God’s only-begotten Son, is set as a sign and a surety that in the end God will have the last word history and that he is truth and love. p. 21
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Let’s focus on one of the above: Cynicism of those to whom nothing is sacred, and think of “The Freedom of Choice Act” which Congress may be voting on this year. See K. of C. Columbia, Jan. 2009 edition, “A Serious Threat.” 16-19
1) The Freedom of Choice Act would jeopardize human life and freedom of conscience in the United States. 2) The progress made by the pro-life movement over the past 35 years in limiting and reducing abortions through modest regulations could vanish overnight.
3) The danger is that a bad court decision {Roe} will be enshrined in bad legislation that is more radical than the 1973 Supreme Court decision itself.
4) FOCA would create a “fundamental right” to abortion and sweep away the more than 300 federal, state or local regulations that currently exist.
THE ABOVE ARE THE REASONS WHY WE MAIL OUT THE “FOCA POSTCARDS” TO OUR POLITICIANS IN CONGRESS!
George H. Kubeck
In pursuit of the truth – cinops be gone – Wednesday, January 14, 2009
The Jan. 12th entry in Pope Benedict’s book, Co-Workers of the Truth, “Meditations for Every Day,” is appropriate for our times:
What we fear nowadays is the darkness that emanates from man, and in this fear we have finally discovered true darkness – more fearful in this century of man’s inhumanity that could ever have been imagined by the generations that preceded us.
We are afraid that the good in the world will become completely powerless; that eventually it will not longer be meaningful to seek the good in truth, purity, justice, or love because the law of the sharper elbow is now the only law that prevails in the world, because the tendency of the world is to judge in favor of the violent, the brutal and not the saintly.
For we see what rules the world is MONEY, THE ATOM BOMB, THE CYNICISM of those to whom nothing is sacred.
How often we find ourselves fearing that there is, after all, no meaning in the chaotic flurry of this world; ultimately, world history will divide all men into the stupid and the strong. There’s a general feeling that the powers of darkness are on the increase, that the good is powerless – the feeling that assails us when we look at the world is the same feeling that must have once assailed our ancestors in autumn and winter when the sun seemed to be engaged in a death struggle.
Will it survive? Will the good continue to have meaning and power in the world? In the stable at Bethlehem as sign that enables us to answer with a joyous yes! For the Child, God’s only-begotten Son, is set as a sign and a surety that in the end God will have the last word history and that he is truth and love. p. 21
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Let’s focus on one of the above: Cynicism of those to whom nothing is sacred, and think of “The Freedom of Choice Act” which Congress may be voting on this year. See K. of C. Columbia, Jan. 2009 edition, “A Serious Threat.” 16-19
1) The Freedom of Choice Act would jeopardize human life and freedom of conscience in the United States. 2) The progress made by the pro-life movement over the past 35 years in limiting and reducing abortions through modest regulations could vanish overnight.
3) The danger is that a bad court decision {Roe} will be enshrined in bad legislation that is more radical than the 1973 Supreme Court decision itself.
4) FOCA would create a “fundamental right” to abortion and sweep away the more than 300 federal, state or local regulations that currently exist.
THE ABOVE ARE THE REASONS WHY WE MAIL OUT THE “FOCA POSTCARDS” TO OUR POLITICIANS IN CONGRESS!
George H. Kubeck
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
MARIO CUOMO - THE CINOP BRAIN - 4 OF 5
MARIO CUOMO – THE CINOP BRAIN – 4 of 5
In pursuit of the truth – cinops be gone – Tuesday, January 13, 2009
We continue with historian Carlin’s book, “Can a Catholic Be a Democrat?”
# 3 Catholic shortcomings/hypocrisy: (cont’d)
“Despite the teachings in our homes and schools and pulpits, despite the sermons and pleadings of parents and priests and prelates, despite all the efforts of defining our opposition to the sin of abortion, collectively we Catholics apparently believe –and perhaps act – little differently from those who don’t share our commitment.
Are we asking government to make criminal what we believe to be sinful because we ourselves can’t stop committing the sin? The failure here is not Caesar’s. This failure is our failure, the failure of the entire people of God.
Nobody has expressed this better than a bishop in my own state, Joseph Sullivan … “The major problem the Church has internal,” the bishop said last month in reference to abortion. “How do we teach? As much as I think we are responsible for advocating public policy issues, our primary responsibility is to teach our own people. We haven’t done that. We’re asking politicians to do what we haven’t done effectively ourselves.”
I agree with the bishop …. Unless we Catholics … set an example that is clear and compelling, then we will never convince this society to change the civil laws to protect what we preach is precious human life."
For the most part, any Catholic can say, “Amen!” to this. Yet Cuomo (committing what logic textbooks call “the fallacy of division”) speaks as though all Catholics exhibit the softness on abortion that’s exhibited by the “average” Catholic. He fails to note that when it comes to abortion there is found among American Catholics something that statisticians call a bimodal distribution. Some (let’s call them “orthodox Catholics”) strongly adhere to traditional Church teaching; they regard abortion as unwarranted homicide and judge America’s abortion regime to be a system of mass killing of innocents. Others (let’s call them “cafeteria Catholics”) have “conformed themselves to the world.”… But does this mean that orthodox Catholics must strictly abstain from seeking anti-abortion legislation because their “cafeteria” co-religionists condone abortion? This hardly seems reasonable or fair – yet this is what Cuomo is arguing. 206-7
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Maybe Mario Cuomo forgot what happened in Louisiana. “In early 1962, Archbishop Joseph Rummel said that in the following year, Catholic schools would integrate. Several Catholic politicians organized public protests and letter-writing campaigns. They threatened a boycott of Catholic schools.
On April 16, 1962 , Rummel excommunicated three prominent Catholics – a judge, a political writer, and community organizer –for publicly defying the teaching of their church.”
The New Orleans events made national news, covered by the Time magazine and the New York Times. The Times editorial board gushed that “ men of all faiths must admire {Rummel} unwavering courage” because he “set an example founded on religious principle and is responsive to the social conscience of our time.” p. 56-7, Charles J. Chaput, Archbishop of Denver, Render Unto Caesar, Doubleday, 2008.
George H. Kubeck
In pursuit of the truth – cinops be gone – Tuesday, January 13, 2009
We continue with historian Carlin’s book, “Can a Catholic Be a Democrat?”
# 3 Catholic shortcomings/hypocrisy: (cont’d)
“Despite the teachings in our homes and schools and pulpits, despite the sermons and pleadings of parents and priests and prelates, despite all the efforts of defining our opposition to the sin of abortion, collectively we Catholics apparently believe –and perhaps act – little differently from those who don’t share our commitment.
Are we asking government to make criminal what we believe to be sinful because we ourselves can’t stop committing the sin? The failure here is not Caesar’s. This failure is our failure, the failure of the entire people of God.
Nobody has expressed this better than a bishop in my own state, Joseph Sullivan … “The major problem the Church has internal,” the bishop said last month in reference to abortion. “How do we teach? As much as I think we are responsible for advocating public policy issues, our primary responsibility is to teach our own people. We haven’t done that. We’re asking politicians to do what we haven’t done effectively ourselves.”
I agree with the bishop …. Unless we Catholics … set an example that is clear and compelling, then we will never convince this society to change the civil laws to protect what we preach is precious human life."
For the most part, any Catholic can say, “Amen!” to this. Yet Cuomo (committing what logic textbooks call “the fallacy of division”) speaks as though all Catholics exhibit the softness on abortion that’s exhibited by the “average” Catholic. He fails to note that when it comes to abortion there is found among American Catholics something that statisticians call a bimodal distribution. Some (let’s call them “orthodox Catholics”) strongly adhere to traditional Church teaching; they regard abortion as unwarranted homicide and judge America’s abortion regime to be a system of mass killing of innocents. Others (let’s call them “cafeteria Catholics”) have “conformed themselves to the world.”… But does this mean that orthodox Catholics must strictly abstain from seeking anti-abortion legislation because their “cafeteria” co-religionists condone abortion? This hardly seems reasonable or fair – yet this is what Cuomo is arguing. 206-7
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Maybe Mario Cuomo forgot what happened in Louisiana. “In early 1962, Archbishop Joseph Rummel said that in the following year, Catholic schools would integrate. Several Catholic politicians organized public protests and letter-writing campaigns. They threatened a boycott of Catholic schools.
On April 16, 1962 , Rummel excommunicated three prominent Catholics – a judge, a political writer, and community organizer –for publicly defying the teaching of their church.”
The New Orleans events made national news, covered by the Time magazine and the New York Times. The Times editorial board gushed that “ men of all faiths must admire {Rummel} unwavering courage” because he “set an example founded on religious principle and is responsive to the social conscience of our time.” p. 56-7, Charles J. Chaput, Archbishop of Denver, Render Unto Caesar, Doubleday, 2008.
George H. Kubeck
Monday, January 12, 2009
MARIO CUOMO - THE CINOP BRAIN - 3
MARIO CUOMO – THE CINOP BRAIN - 3
In pursuit of the truth – cinops be gone – Monday, January 12, 2009
We continue with David Carlin’s book, “Can a Catholic Be a Democrat? 204-6
# 2 – The practicality – and – prudence defense. (cont’d) This wasn’t because they held slavery to be morally permissible; rather, it was because they made a prudential judgment that denouncing it would serve no useful purpose – indeed, it might even cause harm. Cuomo says he’d like to see the bishops observe a similar reticence when it comes to abortion, for legal bans on abortion are not practical and therefore are imprudent.
“I believe {he says} that legal interdicting of all abortions by either the federal government or the individual states is not a plausible possibility and, even if it could be obtained, it wouldn’t work. Given present attitudes, it would be Prohibition revisited, legislating what couldn’t be enforced and in the process creating a disrespect for law in general.”
Cuomo is obviously correct that it would be impossible in practice to pass an amendment to the U.S. Constitution banning abortion. It was a political impossibility at the time he made his Notre Dame speech, and it remains so today. But is it impossible to ban abortion in individual states? It might have been, and might still be today, impossible in his own state of New York, and in other states in the Northeast and on the West Coast. But even in these “impossible” states, a strong case can be made for attempting to enact anti-abortion laws. The proposed legislation might not pass, at least not for many years, but the legislative and public debates surrounding such proposals could well serve a useful educational purpose. Such would not be the first time that unsuccessful legislative attempts gradually enlightened the public.
What about the “red” states? Even in 1984, many of those states would have been able to enact strong anti-abortion laws if the Court’s Roe decision had not stood in their way. And certainly they would be able to do so today, especially when the Republican Party, an anti-abortion party, is far more powerful in the South than it was in 1984. Should Roe be overturned in the near future, there can be little doubt that many states – and not just in the South – would rush to enact abortion-restriction legislation.
And what about Cuomo’s contention that laws banning abortion couldn’t be enforced? He makes this assertion without defending it - other than to suggest comparisons with Prohibition-era speakeasies and bootleggers. I’ll discuss the practicality of enforcement later, but for now let us just say this: in the 1920’s, it was far easier to sneak an illegal drink during Prohibition than it would be to sneak an illegal abortion in 21st century Alabama. It’s true enough that a haphazardly enforced law against abortion in the state of New York might create “disrespect for law in general,” but would a well- reasonably enforced law in Alabama have the same effect? More important, if he’s concerned about how bad law can create disrespect for law in general, why does Cuomo not mention the disrespect for law in general, why does Cuomo not mention the disrespect generated by the Roe v. Wade decision? Hasn’t the cultural divide over that decision served to undermine respect for the Supreme Court and for courts in general – and worse still, for the Constitution?
# 3 – Catholic shortcomings/hypocrisy: It ill befits Catholics, says Cuomo, to demand anti-abortion laws when they themselves are so “soft” on abortion:
“Catholics, the statistics show, support the right to abortion in equal proportion to the rest of the population….”
George H. Kubeck
In pursuit of the truth – cinops be gone – Monday, January 12, 2009
We continue with David Carlin’s book, “Can a Catholic Be a Democrat? 204-6
# 2 – The practicality – and – prudence defense. (cont’d) This wasn’t because they held slavery to be morally permissible; rather, it was because they made a prudential judgment that denouncing it would serve no useful purpose – indeed, it might even cause harm. Cuomo says he’d like to see the bishops observe a similar reticence when it comes to abortion, for legal bans on abortion are not practical and therefore are imprudent.
“I believe {he says} that legal interdicting of all abortions by either the federal government or the individual states is not a plausible possibility and, even if it could be obtained, it wouldn’t work. Given present attitudes, it would be Prohibition revisited, legislating what couldn’t be enforced and in the process creating a disrespect for law in general.”
Cuomo is obviously correct that it would be impossible in practice to pass an amendment to the U.S. Constitution banning abortion. It was a political impossibility at the time he made his Notre Dame speech, and it remains so today. But is it impossible to ban abortion in individual states? It might have been, and might still be today, impossible in his own state of New York, and in other states in the Northeast and on the West Coast. But even in these “impossible” states, a strong case can be made for attempting to enact anti-abortion laws. The proposed legislation might not pass, at least not for many years, but the legislative and public debates surrounding such proposals could well serve a useful educational purpose. Such would not be the first time that unsuccessful legislative attempts gradually enlightened the public.
What about the “red” states? Even in 1984, many of those states would have been able to enact strong anti-abortion laws if the Court’s Roe decision had not stood in their way. And certainly they would be able to do so today, especially when the Republican Party, an anti-abortion party, is far more powerful in the South than it was in 1984. Should Roe be overturned in the near future, there can be little doubt that many states – and not just in the South – would rush to enact abortion-restriction legislation.
And what about Cuomo’s contention that laws banning abortion couldn’t be enforced? He makes this assertion without defending it - other than to suggest comparisons with Prohibition-era speakeasies and bootleggers. I’ll discuss the practicality of enforcement later, but for now let us just say this: in the 1920’s, it was far easier to sneak an illegal drink during Prohibition than it would be to sneak an illegal abortion in 21st century Alabama. It’s true enough that a haphazardly enforced law against abortion in the state of New York might create “disrespect for law in general,” but would a well- reasonably enforced law in Alabama have the same effect? More important, if he’s concerned about how bad law can create disrespect for law in general, why does Cuomo not mention the disrespect for law in general, why does Cuomo not mention the disrespect generated by the Roe v. Wade decision? Hasn’t the cultural divide over that decision served to undermine respect for the Supreme Court and for courts in general – and worse still, for the Constitution?
# 3 – Catholic shortcomings/hypocrisy: It ill befits Catholics, says Cuomo, to demand anti-abortion laws when they themselves are so “soft” on abortion:
“Catholics, the statistics show, support the right to abortion in equal proportion to the rest of the population….”
George H. Kubeck
Sunday, January 11, 2009
We are a Church divided! - 2 of 2
We are a Church divided! – 2 of 2
In pursuit of the truth – cinops be gone – Sunday, January 11, 2009
This concludes A. Hendershott’s insightful article in New Oxford Rev. Jan. 09
While the papal document (Ex Corde Ecclesiae) acknowledges that the Catholic university, as a university, possesses the institutional autonomy …, the document reminds those working on Catholic campuses that this freedom must always be viewed “WITHIN THE CONFINES OF THE TRUTH AND COMMON GOOD,” and there must be “fidelity to the Christian message” as it comes to us through the Church.
For Pope John Paul II – and his successor, Pope Benedict XVI – the pursuit of the truth is the university’s way of serving at one and the same time both the dignity of man and the good of the Church. Literally translated as “From the Heart of the Church,” Ex Corde Ecclesiae calls for Catholic colleges to be accountable to local bishops. A key component of this accountability is the controversial requirement within the papal document that all theologians obtain a MANDATUM, or mandate, from the local bishop attesting their teaching is in communion, or in keeping with, official Church teachings. …
So alarmed with the demands of Ex Corde in the early days of its release were Donald Moran S.J. chancellor of Boston College, and Edward Malloy, CSC., president of Notre Dame University, that they wrote an article in the Jesuit magazine America warning that the implementation of the directives would threaten the status of their institutions: “The universities acceptance of the obligations spelled out here would mean the sacrifice of many of those prerogatives that make Catholic universities and their professional staffs the respected and influential members of the higher education community that they are.”...
Describing Ex Corde as “unworkable and dangerous,” the editors of AMERICA warned that the impact of the norms would be “disastrous” for Catholic colleges and universities. The faculty senate at Notre Dame voted unanimously to ignore the guidelines of EX CORDE. …
When Pope Benedict XVI addressed the presidents of Catholic colleges in Washington, D.C., this past April (2008), the Holy Father reminded them to remain faithful to Catholic teaching both inside and outside the classroom. He spoke of a “crisis of truth” rooted in a “crisis of faith” and warned of the creeping “dictatorship of relativism.” …
Until recently, most Catholic bishops have remained silent on these issues – acquiescing to faculty demands for academic freedom. Rejecting the role of the presiding bishop on Catholic campuses. FR. RICHARD McBRIEN, …, has been especially critical of episcopal oversight since the release of EX CORDE.
In an interview in The Chronicles of Higher Education, FR. McBRIEN made his views … clear: “The idea of even suggesting any kind of oversight by non-academic operations of a university – Catholic or not – is odious to anybody in an academic institution … I want criticism to come from people with credentials to criticize. Bishops should be welcome on a Catholic university campus. Give them tickets to the ball games. Let them say Mass, bring them to graduation. Let them sit on the stage….”
Most bishops have complied with faculty demands. Yet, there are signs that this is coming to an end. Since EX CORDE was issued, MARIST COLLEGE, MARYMOUNT MANHATTAN COLLEGE, NAZARETH COLLEGE, AND ST. JOHN FISHER COLLEGE have been stripped of their designation as Catholic colleges by their bishops. …
Pope Benedict XVI would likely favor “evangelical pruning” rather than maintain ties to Catholic institutions that have become too secular…. The time may have come for a “mustard seed Church.” suggesting a “much smaller presence, but with faith whose dimension could move mountains.”
Some of the most faithful members of this mustard-seed Church have been introduced in recent books like “God on the Quad” by Naomi Schaefer Riley and “The New Faithful” by Collen Carroll. … These students are increasingly demanding that the culture of their religious colleges reflect their faith. They are getting assistance from the Cardinal Newman Society…
George H. Kubeck
In pursuit of the truth – cinops be gone – Sunday, January 11, 2009
This concludes A. Hendershott’s insightful article in New Oxford Rev. Jan. 09
While the papal document (Ex Corde Ecclesiae) acknowledges that the Catholic university, as a university, possesses the institutional autonomy …, the document reminds those working on Catholic campuses that this freedom must always be viewed “WITHIN THE CONFINES OF THE TRUTH AND COMMON GOOD,” and there must be “fidelity to the Christian message” as it comes to us through the Church.
For Pope John Paul II – and his successor, Pope Benedict XVI – the pursuit of the truth is the university’s way of serving at one and the same time both the dignity of man and the good of the Church. Literally translated as “From the Heart of the Church,” Ex Corde Ecclesiae calls for Catholic colleges to be accountable to local bishops. A key component of this accountability is the controversial requirement within the papal document that all theologians obtain a MANDATUM, or mandate, from the local bishop attesting their teaching is in communion, or in keeping with, official Church teachings. …
So alarmed with the demands of Ex Corde in the early days of its release were Donald Moran S.J. chancellor of Boston College, and Edward Malloy, CSC., president of Notre Dame University, that they wrote an article in the Jesuit magazine America warning that the implementation of the directives would threaten the status of their institutions: “The universities acceptance of the obligations spelled out here would mean the sacrifice of many of those prerogatives that make Catholic universities and their professional staffs the respected and influential members of the higher education community that they are.”...
Describing Ex Corde as “unworkable and dangerous,” the editors of AMERICA warned that the impact of the norms would be “disastrous” for Catholic colleges and universities. The faculty senate at Notre Dame voted unanimously to ignore the guidelines of EX CORDE. …
When Pope Benedict XVI addressed the presidents of Catholic colleges in Washington, D.C., this past April (2008), the Holy Father reminded them to remain faithful to Catholic teaching both inside and outside the classroom. He spoke of a “crisis of truth” rooted in a “crisis of faith” and warned of the creeping “dictatorship of relativism.” …
Until recently, most Catholic bishops have remained silent on these issues – acquiescing to faculty demands for academic freedom. Rejecting the role of the presiding bishop on Catholic campuses. FR. RICHARD McBRIEN, …, has been especially critical of episcopal oversight since the release of EX CORDE.
In an interview in The Chronicles of Higher Education, FR. McBRIEN made his views … clear: “The idea of even suggesting any kind of oversight by non-academic operations of a university – Catholic or not – is odious to anybody in an academic institution … I want criticism to come from people with credentials to criticize. Bishops should be welcome on a Catholic university campus. Give them tickets to the ball games. Let them say Mass, bring them to graduation. Let them sit on the stage….”
Most bishops have complied with faculty demands. Yet, there are signs that this is coming to an end. Since EX CORDE was issued, MARIST COLLEGE, MARYMOUNT MANHATTAN COLLEGE, NAZARETH COLLEGE, AND ST. JOHN FISHER COLLEGE have been stripped of their designation as Catholic colleges by their bishops. …
Pope Benedict XVI would likely favor “evangelical pruning” rather than maintain ties to Catholic institutions that have become too secular…. The time may have come for a “mustard seed Church.” suggesting a “much smaller presence, but with faith whose dimension could move mountains.”
Some of the most faithful members of this mustard-seed Church have been introduced in recent books like “God on the Quad” by Naomi Schaefer Riley and “The New Faithful” by Collen Carroll. … These students are increasingly demanding that the culture of their religious colleges reflect their faith. They are getting assistance from the Cardinal Newman Society…
George H. Kubeck
Saturday, January 10, 2009
We are a Church divided! - 1 of 2
We are a Church divided! – 1 of 2
In the pursuit of the truth- cinops be gone – Saturday, January 10, 2009
When all is said and done the truth hurts and our know-it-all-pride gets angry. Irregardless, we must strive together to turn a negative into a positive. For example: Wanted: Pro-life atheist or agnostic to run for office against any CINOP.
Question: What is the difference between a CINOP who is for abortion, same-sex marriage, and embryonic stem cell research; and another politician who is for fornication, adultery and pornography? Answer: There isn’t any difference.
There is an article in the New Oxford Review, Jan. 2009, by Anne Hendershott titled, “QUO VADIS, CATHOLIC HIGHER EDUCATION?” I will comment with my own words and with most of the writer Anne.
The social justice agenda, separated from the pro-life agenda of some Catholic college educational system are screwed up. For example, many Catholic colleges encourage student internship at Planned Parenthood. In October 2007 College of the Holy Cross in Worcester, Mass., hosted a conference on pregnancy prevention and invited Planned Parenthood to campus to present 3 workshops on the “latest and greatest” pregnancy-prevention methods.
As a commitment to social justice, students on some Catholic campuses are encouraged to bring their advocacy to the greater community and beyond. IN FACT, THESE COLLEGES HAVE BECOME SPRINGBOARDS OF ADVOCACY FOR THE LEGALIZATION OF SAME-SEX MARRIAGE. Kara Suffredini, a graduate of Boston College Law School and now the legislative attorney for the “National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, told an alumni gathering of the Lambda Law Students in 2005 that “I want to begin by saying that everything I know about queer activism, I learned at Boston College Law School. Put that in your admission brochure.” Sad!
For those who have spent the past two decades working toward the implementation of EX CORDE ECCLESIAE, Pope John Paul II’s 1990 apostolic constitution designed to revitalize Catholic higher education, the recent release of a study by the CARDINAL NEWMAN SOCIETY commissioned a study in 2008 which revealed that a majority of the 506student respondents from 128 Catholic colleges and universities REJECT traditional Catholic teachings on key issues of faith and morality. Drawing from a represent sample of current and recent Catholic college students, findings reveal that, despite Catholic teachings to the contrary, 60 percent of the respondents agree that abortion should be legal, and 57 percent support the legalization of same-sex marriage.
61% of the respondents believe that women should be allowed to be ordained as Catholic priests - `even thought the Vatican has repeatedly affirmed that the all-male priesthood is an unchangeable tradition instituted by Christ Himself….
The study also reveals that a majority of our current and recent students claim that the experience of attending a Catholic college or university made no difference in their support for the Church or her teachings. Worse, 11 percent of the respondents say that their campus experiences decreased their support for Catholic teachings, and 12 percent claim that their campus experience decreased their respect for the pope and the bishops of the Church.
Hold it! One can prove almost anything with statistics. Maybe the above statistics are all wrong. Where does the problem originate? Let’s find out tomorrow in writer Anne Hendershott’s article!
George H. Kubeck
In the pursuit of the truth- cinops be gone – Saturday, January 10, 2009
When all is said and done the truth hurts and our know-it-all-pride gets angry. Irregardless, we must strive together to turn a negative into a positive. For example: Wanted: Pro-life atheist or agnostic to run for office against any CINOP.
Question: What is the difference between a CINOP who is for abortion, same-sex marriage, and embryonic stem cell research; and another politician who is for fornication, adultery and pornography? Answer: There isn’t any difference.
There is an article in the New Oxford Review, Jan. 2009, by Anne Hendershott titled, “QUO VADIS, CATHOLIC HIGHER EDUCATION?” I will comment with my own words and with most of the writer Anne.
The social justice agenda, separated from the pro-life agenda of some Catholic college educational system are screwed up. For example, many Catholic colleges encourage student internship at Planned Parenthood. In October 2007 College of the Holy Cross in Worcester, Mass., hosted a conference on pregnancy prevention and invited Planned Parenthood to campus to present 3 workshops on the “latest and greatest” pregnancy-prevention methods.
As a commitment to social justice, students on some Catholic campuses are encouraged to bring their advocacy to the greater community and beyond. IN FACT, THESE COLLEGES HAVE BECOME SPRINGBOARDS OF ADVOCACY FOR THE LEGALIZATION OF SAME-SEX MARRIAGE. Kara Suffredini, a graduate of Boston College Law School and now the legislative attorney for the “National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, told an alumni gathering of the Lambda Law Students in 2005 that “I want to begin by saying that everything I know about queer activism, I learned at Boston College Law School. Put that in your admission brochure.” Sad!
For those who have spent the past two decades working toward the implementation of EX CORDE ECCLESIAE, Pope John Paul II’s 1990 apostolic constitution designed to revitalize Catholic higher education, the recent release of a study by the CARDINAL NEWMAN SOCIETY commissioned a study in 2008 which revealed that a majority of the 506student respondents from 128 Catholic colleges and universities REJECT traditional Catholic teachings on key issues of faith and morality. Drawing from a represent sample of current and recent Catholic college students, findings reveal that, despite Catholic teachings to the contrary, 60 percent of the respondents agree that abortion should be legal, and 57 percent support the legalization of same-sex marriage.
61% of the respondents believe that women should be allowed to be ordained as Catholic priests - `even thought the Vatican has repeatedly affirmed that the all-male priesthood is an unchangeable tradition instituted by Christ Himself….
The study also reveals that a majority of our current and recent students claim that the experience of attending a Catholic college or university made no difference in their support for the Church or her teachings. Worse, 11 percent of the respondents say that their campus experiences decreased their support for Catholic teachings, and 12 percent claim that their campus experience decreased their respect for the pope and the bishops of the Church.
Hold it! One can prove almost anything with statistics. Maybe the above statistics are all wrong. Where does the problem originate? Let’s find out tomorrow in writer Anne Hendershott’s article!
George H. Kubeck
CARDINAL MINDSZENTY FOUNDATION
Cardinal Mindszenty Foundation
50th Anniversary - November 22, 2008
Dear Friends,
It has been my joy and privilege to make the Cardinal Mindszenty Foundation my life’s work for 50 years. This non-profit educational organization has been blessed in its apostolic mission to uphold the teachings of Christ and defend the faith, families and freedom from Communism and the inroads of atheistic secular culture.
How much the world has changed in a half-century! I have lived to see our hero, Cardinal Mindszenty, freed at last in 1971; the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 along with the collapse of the Soviet Communist empire; the opening of Communist China to the West even as it continues to oppress believers; the tragic rise in abortions all over the world; the emergence of militant Islamic fundamentalism as a threat to the West; and the re-emergence of Russian Communist oppression of the neighboring countries. Although Marxist economics and rhetoric have been thoroughly discredited, Communism remains a threat to liberty in large parts of the world, and a culture of death continues to challenge our beliefs.
One of motives for helping to form the Cardinal Mindszenty Foundation arose from my experience in New York City for Radio Liberty in the 1950’s, when I met refugees from many nationalities that comprised the Soviet Union, including Georgians, Ukrainians and Azerbaijanians. Each refugee told a sad, similar tale of loss of family members, lose of home, loss of Church, job and country because of the Communist takeover of his nation. Each refugee was grateful to America for its welcome and opportunities. I was inspired to work to preserve America’s freedom and to support the freedoms of all people. As time went on, refugees from other Communist countries continued to stream in to America’s shores, such as Hungarians, Cubans, Vietnamese, Afghans, Poles and Nicaraguans, each with his own story of loss.
Our work at CMF would not, of course, be possible without the dedication of our many members and volunteers, generous donors, inspiring Council members, faithful board members, and our small staff in St. Louis. What a thrill it has been for me to have such loyal friends all over the country and beyond. Only the Lord can reward so much kindness.
The need for the Cardinal Mindszenty Foundation has not abated. Read the beautiful testimonials on the following pages for a tribute to our work and your contributions to it. With God’s blessing and the intercession of Our Lady of Fatima, we will continue to combat evil and work for peace throughout the world.
Gratefully,
Eleanor Schlafly, Cardinal Mindszenty Foundation
P.O. Box 11321, 7800 Bonhomme Avenue, Saint Louis, MO 63105 – 0121
www.mindszenty.org - info@mindszenty.org
P.S. I have been a member of the above for more than 40 years. Their monthly Mindszenty Report is outstanding. Subscription rate: $20.00/year Geo. H. Kubeck
Posted: in pursuit of the truth blog – cinops be gone – Saturday, January 10, 2009
50th Anniversary - November 22, 2008
Dear Friends,
It has been my joy and privilege to make the Cardinal Mindszenty Foundation my life’s work for 50 years. This non-profit educational organization has been blessed in its apostolic mission to uphold the teachings of Christ and defend the faith, families and freedom from Communism and the inroads of atheistic secular culture.
How much the world has changed in a half-century! I have lived to see our hero, Cardinal Mindszenty, freed at last in 1971; the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 along with the collapse of the Soviet Communist empire; the opening of Communist China to the West even as it continues to oppress believers; the tragic rise in abortions all over the world; the emergence of militant Islamic fundamentalism as a threat to the West; and the re-emergence of Russian Communist oppression of the neighboring countries. Although Marxist economics and rhetoric have been thoroughly discredited, Communism remains a threat to liberty in large parts of the world, and a culture of death continues to challenge our beliefs.
One of motives for helping to form the Cardinal Mindszenty Foundation arose from my experience in New York City for Radio Liberty in the 1950’s, when I met refugees from many nationalities that comprised the Soviet Union, including Georgians, Ukrainians and Azerbaijanians. Each refugee told a sad, similar tale of loss of family members, lose of home, loss of Church, job and country because of the Communist takeover of his nation. Each refugee was grateful to America for its welcome and opportunities. I was inspired to work to preserve America’s freedom and to support the freedoms of all people. As time went on, refugees from other Communist countries continued to stream in to America’s shores, such as Hungarians, Cubans, Vietnamese, Afghans, Poles and Nicaraguans, each with his own story of loss.
Our work at CMF would not, of course, be possible without the dedication of our many members and volunteers, generous donors, inspiring Council members, faithful board members, and our small staff in St. Louis. What a thrill it has been for me to have such loyal friends all over the country and beyond. Only the Lord can reward so much kindness.
The need for the Cardinal Mindszenty Foundation has not abated. Read the beautiful testimonials on the following pages for a tribute to our work and your contributions to it. With God’s blessing and the intercession of Our Lady of Fatima, we will continue to combat evil and work for peace throughout the world.
Gratefully,
Eleanor Schlafly, Cardinal Mindszenty Foundation
P.O. Box 11321, 7800 Bonhomme Avenue, Saint Louis, MO 63105 – 0121
www.mindszenty.org - info@mindszenty.org
P.S. I have been a member of the above for more than 40 years. Their monthly Mindszenty Report is outstanding. Subscription rate: $20.00/year Geo. H. Kubeck
Posted: in pursuit of the truth blog – cinops be gone – Saturday, January 10, 2009
Friday, January 9, 2009
St. Thomas More - 7
St. Thomas More – 7
In pursuit of the truth – cinops be gone – Friday, Jan. 9, 2009
More’s Early Years – 6 p. 44-6
While More was straddling the line between the world and the cloister, he was elected, in 1504, as a burgess of Parliament, thus drawing him for the first time into the thickets of public affairs. All too soon More proved to be a courageous politician, beginning his career by engaging in a head-on confrontation with reigning monarch over the question of revenue….
In the autumn of 1504, at the end of his years spent with the Carthusians, More wrote to his friend John Colet. Expressing regret that Colet was away from London, he laments that he is thereby deprived of the wisdom of Colet’s sermons and spiritual direction, the latter of which he seems to have felt in particular need of. He then complains of the way the city life can stifle and choke the aspirations of the soul, as contrasted with the spiritually refreshing atmosphere of the countryside…
More’s final decision to remain a layman in the world could not have been easy one for him to make, we know this to have been the case from a comment he made to his daughter thirty years later, shortly before his death….
One need only look at the exemplary family life of Thomas More’s subsequent years, together with his high ideals of lay spirituality and service to his Church, to understand why God kept him in the world. While we cannot know the specific reasons that entered into More’s decision on a state of life, perhaps the best explanation that has been offered is that provided by the author of the so-called “Ro:Ba:” biography of the saint:
…. {A}s God appointed that worthy man John Fisher, Bishop of Rochester, to be the Champion of the Clergy, so he reserved Thomas More in the degree of the laity, to be the proto-Martyr of England that suffered for the defence of the union of the Catholic Church.
Stapleton’s thoughts in this regard are equally valid:
…{P}erhaps it was that God, for his own greater glory, wished him to remain a layman, to accept the honours and to meet the difficulties of public life, and at the same time wished to kept his servant unspotted and unharmed, and even to lead him to the highest perfection of sanctity.
Finally there is the particular eloquent observation of Cresacre More, who had good reason to be especially grateful for his great-grandfather’s decision to embark upon the family life:
… God had allotted him for an other estate, not to live solitary, but that he might be a pattern to married men, how they should carefully bring up their children, how dearly they should carefully bring up their children, how dearly they should love their wives, how they should employ their endeavour wholly for the good of their country, yet excellently perform the virtues of religious men, as, piety, charity, humility, obedience, and conjugal chastity….
As we have already seen above, Thomas More considered the English countryside a far more wholesome place than the city, and thus when he had decided upon his state in life, he was ultimately to ask for the hand of a young and simple country girl in marriage. ...
Mark your calendar for Thursday, Jan 22nd, 2009 from 7-9 P.M. @ the Haskett Library –2650 W. Broadway, Anaheim, Ca. Our “Thomas More Study Group” on American Politics and Religion will meet.
George H. Kubeck, P.O. Box 865, Stanton, Ca. 90680-9998
In pursuit of the truth – cinops be gone – Friday, Jan. 9, 2009
More’s Early Years – 6 p. 44-6
While More was straddling the line between the world and the cloister, he was elected, in 1504, as a burgess of Parliament, thus drawing him for the first time into the thickets of public affairs. All too soon More proved to be a courageous politician, beginning his career by engaging in a head-on confrontation with reigning monarch over the question of revenue….
In the autumn of 1504, at the end of his years spent with the Carthusians, More wrote to his friend John Colet. Expressing regret that Colet was away from London, he laments that he is thereby deprived of the wisdom of Colet’s sermons and spiritual direction, the latter of which he seems to have felt in particular need of. He then complains of the way the city life can stifle and choke the aspirations of the soul, as contrasted with the spiritually refreshing atmosphere of the countryside…
More’s final decision to remain a layman in the world could not have been easy one for him to make, we know this to have been the case from a comment he made to his daughter thirty years later, shortly before his death….
One need only look at the exemplary family life of Thomas More’s subsequent years, together with his high ideals of lay spirituality and service to his Church, to understand why God kept him in the world. While we cannot know the specific reasons that entered into More’s decision on a state of life, perhaps the best explanation that has been offered is that provided by the author of the so-called “Ro:Ba:” biography of the saint:
…. {A}s God appointed that worthy man John Fisher, Bishop of Rochester, to be the Champion of the Clergy, so he reserved Thomas More in the degree of the laity, to be the proto-Martyr of England that suffered for the defence of the union of the Catholic Church.
Stapleton’s thoughts in this regard are equally valid:
…{P}erhaps it was that God, for his own greater glory, wished him to remain a layman, to accept the honours and to meet the difficulties of public life, and at the same time wished to kept his servant unspotted and unharmed, and even to lead him to the highest perfection of sanctity.
Finally there is the particular eloquent observation of Cresacre More, who had good reason to be especially grateful for his great-grandfather’s decision to embark upon the family life:
… God had allotted him for an other estate, not to live solitary, but that he might be a pattern to married men, how they should carefully bring up their children, how dearly they should carefully bring up their children, how dearly they should love their wives, how they should employ their endeavour wholly for the good of their country, yet excellently perform the virtues of religious men, as, piety, charity, humility, obedience, and conjugal chastity….
As we have already seen above, Thomas More considered the English countryside a far more wholesome place than the city, and thus when he had decided upon his state in life, he was ultimately to ask for the hand of a young and simple country girl in marriage. ...
Mark your calendar for Thursday, Jan 22nd, 2009 from 7-9 P.M. @ the Haskett Library –2650 W. Broadway, Anaheim, Ca. Our “Thomas More Study Group” on American Politics and Religion will meet.
George H. Kubeck, P.O. Box 865, Stanton, Ca. 90680-9998
Thursday, January 8, 2009
MARIO CUOMO - THE CINOP BRAIN - 2
MARIO CUOMO – THE CINOP BRAIN - 2
In pursuit of the truth – cinops be gone - Thursday, Jan. 8th, 2009
Historian David Carlin continues in his book, “Can a Catholic Be a Democrat,” to Cuomo’s # 1. the pluralism defense. 202-4:
The fact is that public morality can’t possible be neutral on the matter of abortion: it will to some degree or other, be either pro-abortion or anti-abortion. Cuomo, no matter how sincerely anti-abortion he might be in his private religious convictions, favors a pro-abortion public morality.
Besides, Cuomo’s argument takes for granted that American pluralism is of what may be called the absolute kind, whereas in fact it’s only relative. Pro-pluralism Americans aren’t prepared to tolerate all forms of cultural diversity. Would our cultural pluralists be willing to tolerate, for instance, grisly practice of female genital mutilation, which in parts of Africa is culturally mandated?
After all, in recent decades, migration to the United States from Africa has notably increased, so it’s increasingly likely that there will be African immigrants living in America who approve of this practice. Or are American pluralists ready to tolerate another idea held by many recent immigrants – that men are entitled by nature to outrank women in society and the family and are entitled, if need be, to enforce that social superiority with force?
Of course not. Except for a small number of exceptions among the multiculturalists lunatic fringe, it’s clear that the champions of pluralism don’t favor absolute pluralism; they won’t, in the name of pluralism, allow those who favor genital mutilation or male supremacy to veto American cultural rules banning such things.
But if poor and relatively uneducated immigrant groups aren’t entitled to veto certain values that the majority of Americans prefer, why should a pro-choice minority have a greater entitlement? Why should they be entitled to veto the anti-abortion will of the majority in, say, South Dakota? If the people of South Dakota, acting through their elected officials, wished to ban abortion, why shouldn’t they be free to do so, just as they’re free to ban female genital mutilation and male supremacy.
Cuomo’s “pluralism” argument hinges on the principle of absolute pluralism – a pluralism that virtually nobody believes in, including Mario Cuomo.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
2. The practicality-and-prudence defense. Cuomo has not doubt that abortion is contrary to moral law. Neither does he have any doubt that Catholics ought to try to reduce the number of abortions in the United States. But how best to do this – according to Cuomo, that’s the important question. When bishops teach Catholics that abortion is wrong, they speak with legitimate authority. However, he said, recommending political strategies based on that teaching is something else. When it came to battling moral evils, American bishops have traditionally been pragmatic and prudential. Cuomo notes how in the pre-Civil War period, for example, they didn’t denounce slavery…. To be continued
George H. Kubeck
In pursuit of the truth – cinops be gone - Thursday, Jan. 8th, 2009
Historian David Carlin continues in his book, “Can a Catholic Be a Democrat,” to Cuomo’s # 1. the pluralism defense. 202-4:
The fact is that public morality can’t possible be neutral on the matter of abortion: it will to some degree or other, be either pro-abortion or anti-abortion. Cuomo, no matter how sincerely anti-abortion he might be in his private religious convictions, favors a pro-abortion public morality.
Besides, Cuomo’s argument takes for granted that American pluralism is of what may be called the absolute kind, whereas in fact it’s only relative. Pro-pluralism Americans aren’t prepared to tolerate all forms of cultural diversity. Would our cultural pluralists be willing to tolerate, for instance, grisly practice of female genital mutilation, which in parts of Africa is culturally mandated?
After all, in recent decades, migration to the United States from Africa has notably increased, so it’s increasingly likely that there will be African immigrants living in America who approve of this practice. Or are American pluralists ready to tolerate another idea held by many recent immigrants – that men are entitled by nature to outrank women in society and the family and are entitled, if need be, to enforce that social superiority with force?
Of course not. Except for a small number of exceptions among the multiculturalists lunatic fringe, it’s clear that the champions of pluralism don’t favor absolute pluralism; they won’t, in the name of pluralism, allow those who favor genital mutilation or male supremacy to veto American cultural rules banning such things.
But if poor and relatively uneducated immigrant groups aren’t entitled to veto certain values that the majority of Americans prefer, why should a pro-choice minority have a greater entitlement? Why should they be entitled to veto the anti-abortion will of the majority in, say, South Dakota? If the people of South Dakota, acting through their elected officials, wished to ban abortion, why shouldn’t they be free to do so, just as they’re free to ban female genital mutilation and male supremacy.
Cuomo’s “pluralism” argument hinges on the principle of absolute pluralism – a pluralism that virtually nobody believes in, including Mario Cuomo.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
2. The practicality-and-prudence defense. Cuomo has not doubt that abortion is contrary to moral law. Neither does he have any doubt that Catholics ought to try to reduce the number of abortions in the United States. But how best to do this – according to Cuomo, that’s the important question. When bishops teach Catholics that abortion is wrong, they speak with legitimate authority. However, he said, recommending political strategies based on that teaching is something else. When it came to battling moral evils, American bishops have traditionally been pragmatic and prudential. Cuomo notes how in the pre-Civil War period, for example, they didn’t denounce slavery…. To be continued
George H. Kubeck
Wednesday, January 7, 2009
MARIO CUOMO - THE CINOP BRAIN - 1
MARIO CUOMO - THE CINOP BRAIN -1
The pursuit of the truth access – cinops be gone - Wednesday, Jan. 7, 2009
It is an honor to return to the Catholic author, David Carlin and his book, “Can a Catholic Be a Democrat.” This is the 23rd letter in about 600 in our blog. Mario is the patron saint of the CINOP. Here is David Carlin’s analysis: 201-2
Cuomo proceeds to offer a fourfold defense of the right of Catholic politician to support pro-choice public policies despite his pro-life religious convictions.
*The Pluralism defense: “I protect my right to be a Catholic,” he says, “by preserving your right to believe as a Jew, a Protestant, or nonbeliever, or as anything else your choose. We know that the price of seeking to force our belief on others is that they might someday force theirs on us.
As an American, I’m free, Cuomo grants, to press for a law banning abortion. “But should I? Is it helpful? Is it essential to human dignity? Does it promote harmony and understanding? Or does it divide us so fundamentally that it threatens our ability to function as a pluralistic society?”
He answers these question by saying, “Our public morality … depends on a consensus view of right and wrong. The values derived from religious belief will not – and should not – be accepted as part of the public morality unless they are shared by the pluralistic community at large, by consensus.”
This answer has a number of defects. First, although he doesn’t precisely (or even approximately) define how broad a “consensus” has to be to qualify as a consensus, Cuomo seems to have something like this in mind: that any group constituting a good-size or important minority in society has in effect the right to exercise a veto.
Hence the presence of secularism, almost all of whom support a legal right to abortion, and liberal Christians, most of whom support such a right, would be enough to establish that there’s no “consensus” in the United States in favor of abortion-restricted legislation.
But by this standard, Cuomo would have to say that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was illegitimate since it wasn’t based on a “consensus” – being strongly opposed by white racist, who certainly at the time constituted a good size and important minority in American society. And for the same reason, the Supreme Court’s Brown vs. Board of Education ruling of 1954 would have to be judged illegitimate. And so would the Court’s 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, since at the time the decision was handed down, almost all religious conservative – Catholics, Protestants, Mormons, Orthodox Jews, and others – disapproved of the ruling. Ironically, using his “there must be a consensus” standard, Cuomo should have denounced as illegitimate the Court decision that created the legal right to abortion that he was now defending as public policy.
Second, while Cuomo insists that Catholics have no right to create a “public morality” that includes values not accepted on a consensus basis, he doesn’t apply this rule the other way around: he doesn’t equally insist that secularists have no right to create a public morality that includes values not accepted on a consensus basis. Secularists don’t accept anti-abortion values; hence, says Cuomo, Catholics mustn’t make anti-abortion values part of our public morality.
But he has no objection when secularists (with the very generous help of the U.S. Supreme Court) make pro-abortion values part of our public morality. .. To be continued.
George H. Kubeck
The pursuit of the truth access – cinops be gone - Wednesday, Jan. 7, 2009
It is an honor to return to the Catholic author, David Carlin and his book, “Can a Catholic Be a Democrat.” This is the 23rd letter in about 600 in our blog. Mario is the patron saint of the CINOP. Here is David Carlin’s analysis: 201-2
Cuomo proceeds to offer a fourfold defense of the right of Catholic politician to support pro-choice public policies despite his pro-life religious convictions.
*The Pluralism defense: “I protect my right to be a Catholic,” he says, “by preserving your right to believe as a Jew, a Protestant, or nonbeliever, or as anything else your choose. We know that the price of seeking to force our belief on others is that they might someday force theirs on us.
As an American, I’m free, Cuomo grants, to press for a law banning abortion. “But should I? Is it helpful? Is it essential to human dignity? Does it promote harmony and understanding? Or does it divide us so fundamentally that it threatens our ability to function as a pluralistic society?”
He answers these question by saying, “Our public morality … depends on a consensus view of right and wrong. The values derived from religious belief will not – and should not – be accepted as part of the public morality unless they are shared by the pluralistic community at large, by consensus.”
This answer has a number of defects. First, although he doesn’t precisely (or even approximately) define how broad a “consensus” has to be to qualify as a consensus, Cuomo seems to have something like this in mind: that any group constituting a good-size or important minority in society has in effect the right to exercise a veto.
Hence the presence of secularism, almost all of whom support a legal right to abortion, and liberal Christians, most of whom support such a right, would be enough to establish that there’s no “consensus” in the United States in favor of abortion-restricted legislation.
But by this standard, Cuomo would have to say that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was illegitimate since it wasn’t based on a “consensus” – being strongly opposed by white racist, who certainly at the time constituted a good size and important minority in American society. And for the same reason, the Supreme Court’s Brown vs. Board of Education ruling of 1954 would have to be judged illegitimate. And so would the Court’s 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, since at the time the decision was handed down, almost all religious conservative – Catholics, Protestants, Mormons, Orthodox Jews, and others – disapproved of the ruling. Ironically, using his “there must be a consensus” standard, Cuomo should have denounced as illegitimate the Court decision that created the legal right to abortion that he was now defending as public policy.
Second, while Cuomo insists that Catholics have no right to create a “public morality” that includes values not accepted on a consensus basis, he doesn’t apply this rule the other way around: he doesn’t equally insist that secularists have no right to create a public morality that includes values not accepted on a consensus basis. Secularists don’t accept anti-abortion values; hence, says Cuomo, Catholics mustn’t make anti-abortion values part of our public morality.
But he has no objection when secularists (with the very generous help of the U.S. Supreme Court) make pro-abortion values part of our public morality. .. To be continued.
George H. Kubeck
The Secular Religious Crazies
The Secular Religious Crazies
For a pursuit of the truth access - cinops be gone – Wednesday, January 7, 2009
We have two Americas. The following is an example of Secular America from Dr. Paul Kengor, Jan. 1, 2009 – LifeNews.com, “Safe, Legal and Rare? ….
There is a Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice. (RCRC). It is a coalition of so-called religious groups and denominations that support legalized abortion. Their backgrounds are Christian to Jewish to Unitarian Universalists. Some mainline denominations have formally joined the coalition’s “pro-choice” gospel, including the Episcopal Church, the United Methodist Church, Barack Obama’s United Church of Christ, and several Presbyterian Church USA (PCCUSA) groups. Please study the sick religious mind-set that follows:
RCRC was elated with Obama’s election. They sent out a press release to congratulate this “PRO-CHOICE MAN OF FAITH.” Obama’s message that “America is one nation” holds great promise for defusing the culture wars over abortion that have too often distracted us. We urge President-elect Obama to be Pro-Faith, Pro-Family, Pro-Choice: to uphold Roe vs. Wade and reproductive choice, {and} foster respect for diverse views about abortion.
RCRC encourages Obama to plow full steam ahead with unrestricted abortion-on-demand at all stages of pregnancy, aided and abetted by taxpayer funding, with abortion promotion at home and abroad, and possibly – albeit unbelievably – WITH STUNNING ELIMINATION OF FREEDOM-OF-CONSCIENCE EXEMPTION FOR MEDICAL PERSONNEL WHO CHOOSE NOT TO PARTICIPATE IN ABORTION PROCEDURES. ALL OF THIS WILL CLOSE CATHOLIC AND OTHER CHRISTIAN HOSPITALS THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY.
RCRC is gung-ho for FOCA, the Freedom of Choice Act which is fundamentally unconstitutional. They want to do away with the Hyde Amendment. The want to do away with the old slogan, “safe, legal and rare,” to “safe, legal, rare – and subsidized and promoted, and without freedom of conscience….”
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Maybe all the so-called Catholic organizations that voted for Obama will come out with a press release to counter the above RCRC's press release. You may want to contact them and see if they are sincere and have the guts to do it. (“Catholics United”, “Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good”, “Catholic Democrats”, and “Roman Catholics for Obama-Biden ’08” etc.) They had all this talk of Obama’s social justice and preferential option for the poor.
In the letter dated Thurs. Oct. 23rd, 2008, I had an investigative report on Catholics United# 3. Catholic League President Bill Donohue took a look at the list of contributors to the above organizations. “It seems liberal financier George Soros has been pouring money into Catholic groups that are painting Obama in a favorable light. According to IRS records, both “Catholics United” and “Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good” have benefited by tens of thousands from the unlikely partnership with “Move.Org” founder. Donahue who exposed the link, said, “The reason Soros fund the Catholic left is …{because} they all serve his agenda … to make support for abortion rights a respectable Catholic position.”
George H. Kubeck
For a pursuit of the truth access - cinops be gone – Wednesday, January 7, 2009
We have two Americas. The following is an example of Secular America from Dr. Paul Kengor, Jan. 1, 2009 – LifeNews.com, “Safe, Legal and Rare? ….
There is a Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice. (RCRC). It is a coalition of so-called religious groups and denominations that support legalized abortion. Their backgrounds are Christian to Jewish to Unitarian Universalists. Some mainline denominations have formally joined the coalition’s “pro-choice” gospel, including the Episcopal Church, the United Methodist Church, Barack Obama’s United Church of Christ, and several Presbyterian Church USA (PCCUSA) groups. Please study the sick religious mind-set that follows:
RCRC was elated with Obama’s election. They sent out a press release to congratulate this “PRO-CHOICE MAN OF FAITH.” Obama’s message that “America is one nation” holds great promise for defusing the culture wars over abortion that have too often distracted us. We urge President-elect Obama to be Pro-Faith, Pro-Family, Pro-Choice: to uphold Roe vs. Wade and reproductive choice, {and} foster respect for diverse views about abortion.
RCRC encourages Obama to plow full steam ahead with unrestricted abortion-on-demand at all stages of pregnancy, aided and abetted by taxpayer funding, with abortion promotion at home and abroad, and possibly – albeit unbelievably – WITH STUNNING ELIMINATION OF FREEDOM-OF-CONSCIENCE EXEMPTION FOR MEDICAL PERSONNEL WHO CHOOSE NOT TO PARTICIPATE IN ABORTION PROCEDURES. ALL OF THIS WILL CLOSE CATHOLIC AND OTHER CHRISTIAN HOSPITALS THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY.
RCRC is gung-ho for FOCA, the Freedom of Choice Act which is fundamentally unconstitutional. They want to do away with the Hyde Amendment. The want to do away with the old slogan, “safe, legal and rare,” to “safe, legal, rare – and subsidized and promoted, and without freedom of conscience….”
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Maybe all the so-called Catholic organizations that voted for Obama will come out with a press release to counter the above RCRC's press release. You may want to contact them and see if they are sincere and have the guts to do it. (“Catholics United”, “Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good”, “Catholic Democrats”, and “Roman Catholics for Obama-Biden ’08” etc.) They had all this talk of Obama’s social justice and preferential option for the poor.
In the letter dated Thurs. Oct. 23rd, 2008, I had an investigative report on Catholics United# 3. Catholic League President Bill Donohue took a look at the list of contributors to the above organizations. “It seems liberal financier George Soros has been pouring money into Catholic groups that are painting Obama in a favorable light. According to IRS records, both “Catholics United” and “Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good” have benefited by tens of thousands from the unlikely partnership with “Move.Org” founder. Donahue who exposed the link, said, “The reason Soros fund the Catholic left is …{because} they all serve his agenda … to make support for abortion rights a respectable Catholic position.”
George H. Kubeck
Tuesday, January 6, 2009
HOW WE GOT INTO THIS ABORTION MESS? - 2 OF 2
How we got into this Abortion Mess? – 2 of 2
The website- cinops be gone – Tuesday, January 6, 2009
Anne Hendershott continues to pursue the truth in her Wall Street Journal, article:
Former Jesuit priest Albert Jonsen writes that the Hyannisport colloquium was influenced by the position of another Jesuit, the Rev. John Courtney Murray, a position that “distinguished between the moral aspects of an issue and the feasibility of enacting legislation about that issue.” It was the consensus at the Hyannisport conclave that Catholic politicians “might tolerate legislation that would permit abortion under certain circumstances if political efforts to repress this moral error led to greater perils to social peace and order.”
{This is a cop-out. There were no greater perils to social peace and order. ghk}
Father Milhaven later recalled the Hyannisport meeting during a 1984 breakfast briefing of Catholics for a Free Choice: “The theologians worked for a day and a half among ourselves at a nearby hotel. In the evening we answered questions from the Kennedys and the Shrivers. Though the theologians disagreed on many a point, they all concurred on certain basics … and that was that a Catholic could in good conscience vote in favor of abortion.”
{I graduated from a Jesuit College and the above is malarkey. ghk)
But can they now? There are signs today that some of the bishops are beginning to confront the Catholic politicians who consistently vote in favor of legislation to support abortion. Charles J. Chaput, the archbishop of Denver, has been on the front lines in encouraging Catholics to live their faith without compromise in the public square. Most recently in his book “Render Unto Caesar,” Archbishop Chaput has reminded Catholic politicians of their obligation to protect life.
{This whole business of abortion has morphed into the evils of same-sex marriage, embryonic stem-cell research, assisted-suicide and euthanasia. All of these evils, the pro-choice Catholic politician is now supporting. ghk}
The archbishop is not alone. The agenda at the November’s assembly in the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops included a public discussion of abortion and politics. The bishops’ final statement focused on concern about the possible passage of the “Freedom of Choice Act,” and referred to it as “an evil law that would further divide our country.” The bishops referenced their 2007 document, “Faithful Citizenship,” which maintains that the right to life is the foundation of every other human right. In it, they promised to “persist in the duty to counsel, in the hope that the scandal of their {‘Catholic congregants’} cooperating in evil can be resolved by the proper formation of their consciences.”
{There are consequences to voting for the Democratic Party. Maybe the staff at USCCB will learn on what happens.}
Whether the bishops truly will persist remains to be seen. New York’s Cardinal Edward Egan, for instance, has not publicly challenged Ms. Caroline Kennedy’s pro-choice promises. This is unfortunate. Until the clerics begin to counter the pro-choice claims made by high-profile Catholics such as Nancy Pelosi, Caroline Kennedy, faithful Catholics will continue to be bewildered by their pastoral silence. {But, there will be no silence by informed Catholic laity. ghk}
George H. Kubeck
The website- cinops be gone – Tuesday, January 6, 2009
Anne Hendershott continues to pursue the truth in her Wall Street Journal, article:
Former Jesuit priest Albert Jonsen writes that the Hyannisport colloquium was influenced by the position of another Jesuit, the Rev. John Courtney Murray, a position that “distinguished between the moral aspects of an issue and the feasibility of enacting legislation about that issue.” It was the consensus at the Hyannisport conclave that Catholic politicians “might tolerate legislation that would permit abortion under certain circumstances if political efforts to repress this moral error led to greater perils to social peace and order.”
{This is a cop-out. There were no greater perils to social peace and order. ghk}
Father Milhaven later recalled the Hyannisport meeting during a 1984 breakfast briefing of Catholics for a Free Choice: “The theologians worked for a day and a half among ourselves at a nearby hotel. In the evening we answered questions from the Kennedys and the Shrivers. Though the theologians disagreed on many a point, they all concurred on certain basics … and that was that a Catholic could in good conscience vote in favor of abortion.”
{I graduated from a Jesuit College and the above is malarkey. ghk)
But can they now? There are signs today that some of the bishops are beginning to confront the Catholic politicians who consistently vote in favor of legislation to support abortion. Charles J. Chaput, the archbishop of Denver, has been on the front lines in encouraging Catholics to live their faith without compromise in the public square. Most recently in his book “Render Unto Caesar,” Archbishop Chaput has reminded Catholic politicians of their obligation to protect life.
{This whole business of abortion has morphed into the evils of same-sex marriage, embryonic stem-cell research, assisted-suicide and euthanasia. All of these evils, the pro-choice Catholic politician is now supporting. ghk}
The archbishop is not alone. The agenda at the November’s assembly in the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops included a public discussion of abortion and politics. The bishops’ final statement focused on concern about the possible passage of the “Freedom of Choice Act,” and referred to it as “an evil law that would further divide our country.” The bishops referenced their 2007 document, “Faithful Citizenship,” which maintains that the right to life is the foundation of every other human right. In it, they promised to “persist in the duty to counsel, in the hope that the scandal of their {‘Catholic congregants’} cooperating in evil can be resolved by the proper formation of their consciences.”
{There are consequences to voting for the Democratic Party. Maybe the staff at USCCB will learn on what happens.}
Whether the bishops truly will persist remains to be seen. New York’s Cardinal Edward Egan, for instance, has not publicly challenged Ms. Caroline Kennedy’s pro-choice promises. This is unfortunate. Until the clerics begin to counter the pro-choice claims made by high-profile Catholics such as Nancy Pelosi, Caroline Kennedy, faithful Catholics will continue to be bewildered by their pastoral silence. {But, there will be no silence by informed Catholic laity. ghk}
George H. Kubeck
St. Thomas More - 6
St. Thomas More – 6
The website – cinops be gone – Tues. Jan. 6, 2009
This the 6th report on James Monti’s book on St. Thomas More.
More’s Early Years – 5 - p. 41-44
The concluding words of the 12th and last rule reflect a common-place of More’s meditations and a recurring motif in his life: the remembrance of death:
…{P}eradventure death within one hours,
Shall us bereave, wealth, riches and honour,
And bring us down full low both small and great,
To vile carrion and wretched worms’ meat.
The “Twelve Rules” are followed by reflections on what are termed the “Twelve Weapons of Spiritual Battle”, 12 considerations that can be brought to mind when confronting temptation. The soul is advised to recall in the face of such a trial that the pleasure from the proposed sinful act will be short-lived and minimal, only to be followed by sorrows and even greater loss: …
There is also the need to remember that life is as fleeting as “a dream or shadow on the wall” and that death is ever near, with the danger that the soul in serious sin will die unrepentant, doomed to eternal torments. But in addition to the sad consequences of succumbing to temptation, the soul is also advised to weigh the good that comes from resisting temptation, for all the joys one can experience in this life, “Thou shalt no pleasure comparable find / To the inward gladness of a virtuous mind.” The examples of the saints and martyrs prove that temptation can be with God’s assistance be resisted….
Pico’s seventh property, “To love all things that pertaineth unto his love,” provides More with the opportunity to advocate the reverencing of relics and religious images, thereby demonstrating that his belief in these traditional Catholic devotional practices can be trace back to his early life. It dispels any notion that his impassioned defense of these practices years later in the wake of the Reformation somehow represented a break with the spirituality of his youth: ...
As his edition of Pico draws to a close with a prayer of the latter, More makes the Italian humanist’s thoughts distinctively his own by rendering the original into beautiful English verse, as in the following stanza that describes the Passion as a work of divine love….
The theme of God’s love is carried with commensurate eloquence onward to the end of the prayer, which closes with the vision of heaven and God’s unfathomable mercy:
Grant me good Lord, and Creator of all,
The flame to quench of all sinful desire,
And in thy love set all mine heart afire.
That when the journey of this deadly life
My silly ghost {soul} hath finished, and thence
Depart must, without his fleshly wife
Alone into his Lord’s high presence
He may thee find, O well of indulgence,
In thy lordship not as a lord, but rather
As a very tender loving Father.
George H. Kubeck
The website – cinops be gone – Tues. Jan. 6, 2009
This the 6th report on James Monti’s book on St. Thomas More.
More’s Early Years – 5 - p. 41-44
The concluding words of the 12th and last rule reflect a common-place of More’s meditations and a recurring motif in his life: the remembrance of death:
…{P}eradventure death within one hours,
Shall us bereave, wealth, riches and honour,
And bring us down full low both small and great,
To vile carrion and wretched worms’ meat.
The “Twelve Rules” are followed by reflections on what are termed the “Twelve Weapons of Spiritual Battle”, 12 considerations that can be brought to mind when confronting temptation. The soul is advised to recall in the face of such a trial that the pleasure from the proposed sinful act will be short-lived and minimal, only to be followed by sorrows and even greater loss: …
There is also the need to remember that life is as fleeting as “a dream or shadow on the wall” and that death is ever near, with the danger that the soul in serious sin will die unrepentant, doomed to eternal torments. But in addition to the sad consequences of succumbing to temptation, the soul is also advised to weigh the good that comes from resisting temptation, for all the joys one can experience in this life, “Thou shalt no pleasure comparable find / To the inward gladness of a virtuous mind.” The examples of the saints and martyrs prove that temptation can be with God’s assistance be resisted….
Pico’s seventh property, “To love all things that pertaineth unto his love,” provides More with the opportunity to advocate the reverencing of relics and religious images, thereby demonstrating that his belief in these traditional Catholic devotional practices can be trace back to his early life. It dispels any notion that his impassioned defense of these practices years later in the wake of the Reformation somehow represented a break with the spirituality of his youth: ...
As his edition of Pico draws to a close with a prayer of the latter, More makes the Italian humanist’s thoughts distinctively his own by rendering the original into beautiful English verse, as in the following stanza that describes the Passion as a work of divine love….
The theme of God’s love is carried with commensurate eloquence onward to the end of the prayer, which closes with the vision of heaven and God’s unfathomable mercy:
Grant me good Lord, and Creator of all,
The flame to quench of all sinful desire,
And in thy love set all mine heart afire.
That when the journey of this deadly life
My silly ghost {soul} hath finished, and thence
Depart must, without his fleshly wife
Alone into his Lord’s high presence
He may thee find, O well of indulgence,
In thy lordship not as a lord, but rather
As a very tender loving Father.
George H. Kubeck
Monday, January 5, 2009
HOW WE GOT INTO THIS ABORTION MESS? - 1
How we got into this Abortion Mess? 1 of 2
The website – cinops be gone – Monday, Jan. 5, 2009
We covered this topic in Feb. 22nd, 2008 with Faithful Departed, “The Collapse of Boston’s Catholic Culture.” Let’s check out Anne Hendershott’s article in The Wall Street Journal, Jan. 1, 2009 How Support for Abortion Became Kennedy Dogma. Ms. Hendershott is a professor of urban studies at The King’s College in New York, She is the author of the “The Politics of Abortion”(Encounter Books, 2007). Sadly, we may have to censure some Catholic theologians.
Caroline Kennedy of New York knows that any Kennedy desiring higher office in the Democratic Party must now carry the torch of abortion rights …
Even Ted Kennedy, who gets 100% pro-choice rating from the abortion-rights group NARAL, was at one time pro-life. In fact, in 1971, a full year after New York had legalized abortion; the Massachusetts senator was still championing the rights of the unborn. In a letter to a constituent dated Aug. 3, 1971, he wrote:
“When history looks back to this era it should recognize this generation as one which cared about human beings enough to halt the practice of war, to provide a decent living for every family, and to fulfill its responsibility to its children from the very moment of conception.”
{Today, Ted Kennedy has also a cafeteria conscience on the evils of same-sex marriage, embryonic stem cell research, etc.ghk}
But all that changed in the early 70’s, when Democratic politicians first figured out the powerful abortion lobby could fill THEIR CAMPAIGN COFFERS (and attract new liberal voters). Politicians began to realize that, despite the Catholic Church’s teachings to the contrary, its bishops & priests had ended their public role of responding negatively to those who promoted a pro-choice agenda.
{All of this happened within the Kennedy Democratic party leadership? So to cater to the Kennedy clan and be an enabler of the Democratic Party, let’s find out what happened. Notice it’s all about money and the devil has a lot of it. ghk}
In some cases, church leaders actually started providing “cover” for Catholic pro-choice politicians who wanted to vote in favor of abortion rights. At a meeting at the Kennedy compound in Hyannisport, Mass., on a hot summer day in 1964, the Kennedy family and its advisers and allies were coached by leading theologians and Catholic college professors on how to accept and promote abortion WITH A “CLEAR CONSCIENCE.”
{So we had a mindset within the U.S. Church similar to what produced the Bishop’s sex scandal. It was wrong then & 45 years later it is wrong now.ghk}
The former Jesuit priest Albert Jonsen, emeritus professor of ethics at the University of Washington, recalls the meeting in his boot “Birth of Bioethics” (Oxford, 2003). He writes about how he joined with the Rev. Joseph Fuchs, a Catholic moral theologian: the Rev. Robert Drinan, then dean of Boston College Law School; and three academic theologians, the Revs. Giles Milhaven, Richard McCormick and Charles Curran, to enable the Kennedy family to redefine support for abortion....
George H. Kubeck
The website – cinops be gone – Monday, Jan. 5, 2009
We covered this topic in Feb. 22nd, 2008 with Faithful Departed, “The Collapse of Boston’s Catholic Culture.” Let’s check out Anne Hendershott’s article in The Wall Street Journal, Jan. 1, 2009 How Support for Abortion Became Kennedy Dogma. Ms. Hendershott is a professor of urban studies at The King’s College in New York, She is the author of the “The Politics of Abortion”(Encounter Books, 2007). Sadly, we may have to censure some Catholic theologians.
Caroline Kennedy of New York knows that any Kennedy desiring higher office in the Democratic Party must now carry the torch of abortion rights …
Even Ted Kennedy, who gets 100% pro-choice rating from the abortion-rights group NARAL, was at one time pro-life. In fact, in 1971, a full year after New York had legalized abortion; the Massachusetts senator was still championing the rights of the unborn. In a letter to a constituent dated Aug. 3, 1971, he wrote:
“When history looks back to this era it should recognize this generation as one which cared about human beings enough to halt the practice of war, to provide a decent living for every family, and to fulfill its responsibility to its children from the very moment of conception.”
{Today, Ted Kennedy has also a cafeteria conscience on the evils of same-sex marriage, embryonic stem cell research, etc.ghk}
But all that changed in the early 70’s, when Democratic politicians first figured out the powerful abortion lobby could fill THEIR CAMPAIGN COFFERS (and attract new liberal voters). Politicians began to realize that, despite the Catholic Church’s teachings to the contrary, its bishops & priests had ended their public role of responding negatively to those who promoted a pro-choice agenda.
{All of this happened within the Kennedy Democratic party leadership? So to cater to the Kennedy clan and be an enabler of the Democratic Party, let’s find out what happened. Notice it’s all about money and the devil has a lot of it. ghk}
In some cases, church leaders actually started providing “cover” for Catholic pro-choice politicians who wanted to vote in favor of abortion rights. At a meeting at the Kennedy compound in Hyannisport, Mass., on a hot summer day in 1964, the Kennedy family and its advisers and allies were coached by leading theologians and Catholic college professors on how to accept and promote abortion WITH A “CLEAR CONSCIENCE.”
{So we had a mindset within the U.S. Church similar to what produced the Bishop’s sex scandal. It was wrong then & 45 years later it is wrong now.ghk}
The former Jesuit priest Albert Jonsen, emeritus professor of ethics at the University of Washington, recalls the meeting in his boot “Birth of Bioethics” (Oxford, 2003). He writes about how he joined with the Rev. Joseph Fuchs, a Catholic moral theologian: the Rev. Robert Drinan, then dean of Boston College Law School; and three academic theologians, the Revs. Giles Milhaven, Richard McCormick and Charles Curran, to enable the Kennedy family to redefine support for abortion....
George H. Kubeck
Sunday, January 4, 2009
On Obedience to Local Bishops
On Obedience to Local Bishops
The website – cinops be gone – Sunday, Jan. 4, 2009
Canonist Dominican J.D. Brunetta, Faith and Family, Sep. /Oct. 08 – p. 43:
If the pope is the head of the Church, why do we need to follow the precepts of the local bishop?
Answer: The pope is “the bishop of the Church of Rome, in whom continues the office given by the Lord uniquely to Peter, the first of the apostles,” and he “is the head of the college of bishops, the Vicar of Christ, and pastor of the universal Church on earth.”
By virtue of his office, the Holy Father therefore possesses “supreme, full, immediate and universal ordinary power in the Church (Canon 331).
Yet while the pope possesses this universal power in the Church, the authority of the diocesan bishops is not merely delegated to them by the pope. Rather, the bishops, “who by divine institution succeed in the place of the apostles through the Holy Spirit who has been given to them” (Canon 375, 1), form a single college, i.e., collegial body, with the pope as its head, “by virtue of sacramental consecration and hierarchical communion with the head and members” (Canon 336). As the apostles did not receive their authority from Peter, but from Christ, so the bishops receive their authority not from the pope but through the power of the Holy Spirit.
By virtue of the fullness of the sacrament of holy order, the bishops “are constituted pastors of the Church, so that they are teachers of doctrine, priests of sacred worship, and ministers of governance” (Canon 375). As successors to the apostle, our local bishops have “all ordinary, proper, and immediate power which is required for the exercise of {their} pastoral function (Canon 381, 1)….
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
“THE TASK OF THE BISHOP: HE TOO, AND ESPECIALLY HE, IS A “CO-WORKER”, THAT IS, HE DOES NOT ACT IN HIS OWN NAME BUT ALWAYS AND TOTALLY TO A “WITH”. ONLY WHEN HE ACTS “WITH” CHRIST AND “WITH” THE WHOLE BELIEVING CHURCH OF ALL TIMES AND ALL PLACES DOES HE WHAT HE IS MEANT TO DO. IT IS NOT HIS TASK TO FASHION A COMMUNITY FOR HIMSELF, BUT, RATHER TO FASHION THE CHURCH FOR CHRIST. THAT MEANS HE MUST POINT TO HIM WHO IS THE WAY BECAUSE HE IS THE TRUTH. (JN 14:6)
“For the simple reason that it comes from the truth and leads to the truth, the love that is the goal of faith is, in a very real sense the hope and redemption of the human race, A MERE COMMUNITY OF INTERESTS WITHOUT TRUTH WOULD BE JUST A DRUG, NOT A HEALING….”co-workers of the truth” is the relationship between truth and love.” Pope Benedict XVI in Co-Workers of the Truth.”
Our Holy Father’s Monthly Intentions for January: Family: - That the family may increasingly be a place of formation in charity, personal growth, and the transmission of the faith. Christian Unity: - That Christian denominations may strive for full unity so as to be more credible witnesses of the Gospel to a world in need of a “new evangelization.”
From Pope Benedict’s visit to America in 2008, truth and pro-life are the future; status quo and religious correctness are the past. Evangelize - orthodoxy.
George H. Kubeck
The website – cinops be gone – Sunday, Jan. 4, 2009
Canonist Dominican J.D. Brunetta, Faith and Family, Sep. /Oct. 08 – p. 43:
If the pope is the head of the Church, why do we need to follow the precepts of the local bishop?
Answer: The pope is “the bishop of the Church of Rome, in whom continues the office given by the Lord uniquely to Peter, the first of the apostles,” and he “is the head of the college of bishops, the Vicar of Christ, and pastor of the universal Church on earth.”
By virtue of his office, the Holy Father therefore possesses “supreme, full, immediate and universal ordinary power in the Church (Canon 331).
Yet while the pope possesses this universal power in the Church, the authority of the diocesan bishops is not merely delegated to them by the pope. Rather, the bishops, “who by divine institution succeed in the place of the apostles through the Holy Spirit who has been given to them” (Canon 375, 1), form a single college, i.e., collegial body, with the pope as its head, “by virtue of sacramental consecration and hierarchical communion with the head and members” (Canon 336). As the apostles did not receive their authority from Peter, but from Christ, so the bishops receive their authority not from the pope but through the power of the Holy Spirit.
By virtue of the fullness of the sacrament of holy order, the bishops “are constituted pastors of the Church, so that they are teachers of doctrine, priests of sacred worship, and ministers of governance” (Canon 375). As successors to the apostle, our local bishops have “all ordinary, proper, and immediate power which is required for the exercise of {their} pastoral function (Canon 381, 1)….
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
“THE TASK OF THE BISHOP: HE TOO, AND ESPECIALLY HE, IS A “CO-WORKER”, THAT IS, HE DOES NOT ACT IN HIS OWN NAME BUT ALWAYS AND TOTALLY TO A “WITH”. ONLY WHEN HE ACTS “WITH” CHRIST AND “WITH” THE WHOLE BELIEVING CHURCH OF ALL TIMES AND ALL PLACES DOES HE WHAT HE IS MEANT TO DO. IT IS NOT HIS TASK TO FASHION A COMMUNITY FOR HIMSELF, BUT, RATHER TO FASHION THE CHURCH FOR CHRIST. THAT MEANS HE MUST POINT TO HIM WHO IS THE WAY BECAUSE HE IS THE TRUTH. (JN 14:6)
“For the simple reason that it comes from the truth and leads to the truth, the love that is the goal of faith is, in a very real sense the hope and redemption of the human race, A MERE COMMUNITY OF INTERESTS WITHOUT TRUTH WOULD BE JUST A DRUG, NOT A HEALING….”co-workers of the truth” is the relationship between truth and love.” Pope Benedict XVI in Co-Workers of the Truth.”
Our Holy Father’s Monthly Intentions for January: Family: - That the family may increasingly be a place of formation in charity, personal growth, and the transmission of the faith. Christian Unity: - That Christian denominations may strive for full unity so as to be more credible witnesses of the Gospel to a world in need of a “new evangelization.”
From Pope Benedict’s visit to America in 2008, truth and pro-life are the future; status quo and religious correctness are the past. Evangelize - orthodoxy.
George H. Kubeck
Saturday, January 3, 2009
GIVE ME A BREAK!
Give Me a Break!
The website – cinops be gone – Saturday, January 3, 2009
The following from LifeSiteNews.com, Monday, Dec. 22, 2009:
This job applicant for U.S. Senator wants to use her maiden name and not here married name. She wants to be appointed by Gov. David Patterson of New York to take the place Hillary Rodham Clinton.
OK, she is the daughter of President John F. Kennedy. What are Caroline Kennedy’s qualifications? She is a Harvard and Columbia-educated lawyer. She is an author and prodigious fundraiser for New York City public schools.
But the following has not been pointed out by the news media and journalists. Caroline is firmly entrenched in favor of abortion and same-sex marriage. She supports “full equality and marriage rights for gay and lesbian couples.” This means that in California, Florida and Arizona she would have been opposed to Proposition 8 that marriage legally is only between a man and a woman. She is like California’s Gov. Arnold, Jerry Brown and Nancy Pelosi.
Also, “Caroline believes that young women facing unwanted pregnancies should have the advice of caring adults, but this should not be required by law.” In other words she is opposed to parental notification laws which are in about 35 states. Caroline would have worked for the defeat of Proposition 4 in California.
On the question of late-term abortions, Kennedy was said to “support Roe
Vs. Wade, which prohibits third-trimester abortions except when the life or health of the mother is at risk.” In other words, she is for partial-birth abortions.
What’s my beef? She calls herself a Roman Catholic. She is living a lie in the public arena. She needs to be exposed and censured by Catholics individuals, organizations and Catholic bishops. She is using the Catholic-label for electioneering purposes and is a horrendous scandal for the faithful and a role model for the second or third largest religious group in America. (Ex-Catholics)
Will she remain a Trojan horse for a Secular America within the Catholic Church?
Root Cause of War on Christmas
Catholic League president Bill Donohue hit the nail on the head.
“The root cause of the war on Christmas, which is conducted almost exclusively by well-educated white people in the U.S., Canada, Europe and Australia – the very same people who like gay marriage – has almost nothing to do with fidelity to law (the First Amendment in the U.S.): it has to do with ideology.”
“The ideology is plainly an expression of left-wing secularism, and it is nothing if not anti-Western and anti-Christian. At its worst, it is driven by hatred; at its best, it is driven by a defensive posture, a deep sense of embarrassment over the legacy of Western civilization. There is no historical or moral justification for either. Moreover, those who are pursuing this agenda generally lie about their work.
“Want proof that hate is driving this assault?” The head of the ACLU in New Hampshire, Claire Ebel, advises that if crèches are allowed in parks, it is permissible ‘for a display of satanic ritual.’ And this hatred of Christmas is not exclusive to the U.S. In England, Muslim preacher Anjem Choudary called Christmas ‘evil’ in a recent sermon. No wonder they are banning words like ‘bishop,’ ‘chapel.’ and ‘nun’ from the Oxford Junior Dictionary. And all of this is being endorsed, by self-hating Christians, as well.”
George H. Kubeck
The website – cinops be gone – Saturday, January 3, 2009
The following from LifeSiteNews.com, Monday, Dec. 22, 2009:
This job applicant for U.S. Senator wants to use her maiden name and not here married name. She wants to be appointed by Gov. David Patterson of New York to take the place Hillary Rodham Clinton.
OK, she is the daughter of President John F. Kennedy. What are Caroline Kennedy’s qualifications? She is a Harvard and Columbia-educated lawyer. She is an author and prodigious fundraiser for New York City public schools.
But the following has not been pointed out by the news media and journalists. Caroline is firmly entrenched in favor of abortion and same-sex marriage. She supports “full equality and marriage rights for gay and lesbian couples.” This means that in California, Florida and Arizona she would have been opposed to Proposition 8 that marriage legally is only between a man and a woman. She is like California’s Gov. Arnold, Jerry Brown and Nancy Pelosi.
Also, “Caroline believes that young women facing unwanted pregnancies should have the advice of caring adults, but this should not be required by law.” In other words she is opposed to parental notification laws which are in about 35 states. Caroline would have worked for the defeat of Proposition 4 in California.
On the question of late-term abortions, Kennedy was said to “support Roe
Vs. Wade, which prohibits third-trimester abortions except when the life or health of the mother is at risk.” In other words, she is for partial-birth abortions.
What’s my beef? She calls herself a Roman Catholic. She is living a lie in the public arena. She needs to be exposed and censured by Catholics individuals, organizations and Catholic bishops. She is using the Catholic-label for electioneering purposes and is a horrendous scandal for the faithful and a role model for the second or third largest religious group in America. (Ex-Catholics)
Will she remain a Trojan horse for a Secular America within the Catholic Church?
Root Cause of War on Christmas
Catholic League president Bill Donohue hit the nail on the head.
“The root cause of the war on Christmas, which is conducted almost exclusively by well-educated white people in the U.S., Canada, Europe and Australia – the very same people who like gay marriage – has almost nothing to do with fidelity to law (the First Amendment in the U.S.): it has to do with ideology.”
“The ideology is plainly an expression of left-wing secularism, and it is nothing if not anti-Western and anti-Christian. At its worst, it is driven by hatred; at its best, it is driven by a defensive posture, a deep sense of embarrassment over the legacy of Western civilization. There is no historical or moral justification for either. Moreover, those who are pursuing this agenda generally lie about their work.
“Want proof that hate is driving this assault?” The head of the ACLU in New Hampshire, Claire Ebel, advises that if crèches are allowed in parks, it is permissible ‘for a display of satanic ritual.’ And this hatred of Christmas is not exclusive to the U.S. In England, Muslim preacher Anjem Choudary called Christmas ‘evil’ in a recent sermon. No wonder they are banning words like ‘bishop,’ ‘chapel.’ and ‘nun’ from the Oxford Junior Dictionary. And all of this is being endorsed, by self-hating Christians, as well.”
George H. Kubeck
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)