Holy Father in Croatia - Warns about co-habitation

Don't give in to the secular mentality which views living together as a preparation for marriage, warned Pope Benedict XVI in a homily to Croatians, half a million of them who were gathered for his Mass. The Holy Father added that living together was also not a substitute for marriage. He affirmed the need to respect life from pre-born to natural death and further stated:

"Dear parents, commit yourselves always to teach your children to pray, and pray with them; draw them close to the Sacraments, especially to the Eucharist..."

Materialism is being advocated as the source of happiness, obscuring deeper human values, continued the Pope, and love has been reduced to a combination of sentimentality and "to the gratification of instinctive impulses" without commitment. Christians are called to make the commitment of marriage and deeper values and to teach this to their children and to be always open to life.

The family is a small "domestic church", said Benedict XVI.

I guess Europe has issues similar to the USA - I hope Catholics do take the Holy Father's words seriously - to stand up for the truth especially with one's family, is difficult but then, the easy way out is never the best way.

It's like Bishop Sheen said "sin is a moment of pleasure and a lifetime of pain and virtue is a moment of pain and a lifetime of joy"

March for Life -revisiting it

We went to one of the first Marches for Life in our city, in the late 1970's... a few hundred showed up and we marched and ended up at a Rally which was more of an Evangelical Evangelism effort than anything else. Amidst the music groups, one speaker got up and said 'this is not a church issue but a civil rights issue'. He was basically ignored as the music went on. It was mostly unimpressive to say the least.

So I have skipped all the marches since then but this year, EWTN, the Global Catholic Network, had complete live coverage of both the March on Washington and the West Coast March for life (in San Francisco) and I decided to watch it.

I discovered things have greatly changed since the 1970's. For the March in Washington, 500,000 marchers, by most reports showed up - it looked more like a million when I watched on TV. The speakers included tearful women who regretted their abortions (and were hurt by them), Abby Johnson who ran a Planned Parenthood clinic for several years, who had recently quit her clinic and joined the Pro Life movement after watching a doctor abort a 13 week fetus using guided ultra sound, Lila Rose, a young person who went under cover as a 13 year old seeking an abortion to several Planned Parenthood clinics and discovered they were willing to cover up that her boyfriend was 22 and that they tried to talk her into an abortion and more.

One of the speakers was a Rabbi who was extremely passionate about abortion and how it was hurting women and babies.

Also on the platform were several Congress persons, Catholic Bishops and clergy. And standing behind the speakers on the platform, several women held up signs which read "I regret my abortion".

The weather was cold and grey but this did not stop or slow down the March and the most impressive thing was perhaps that a goodly portion of March attendees were young people. Young people are the hope of our country, the future and if so many of them are pro life, we are looking in much better shape than I've thought.

It rained at the West Coast March for life in San Francisco but 40,000 marchers showed up and marched in the cold rain.

Watching these marches, I'd say the future of the pro life movement looked very hopeful - there was a lot more substance than the Rally I attended 30 years ago.

Things change and sometimes for the better!

Time for the sleeping Majority to wake up and get activist

Obama's new strategy

Recently President Obama has come out strongly, saying he will work to destroy the protections for traditional marriage. (The Protection of Marriage Act was signed by President Clinton). The Gay and Lesbian community is delighted of course. And nasty. On Facebook, I expressed concern about Obama receiving the Peace Prize and one "friend" who is gay, and supposedly a long time friend in real life, has dropped both myself and hubby from his friendship.

I asked myself why our president is catering to this small minority and then, I realized why.

They may be a small minority but they have learned what the Christian majority has NOT YET learned and that is that activism works.

The Gay and Lesbian community unlike the mostly sleeping passive Christians, is loud and "in your face" and activist and Obama figures they will help him trample on Christian morals and rights -- again.

In the meantime, Congress is rushing through, Healthcare "reform" which is actually pushing us toward a government option which will pay for killing babies in the womb but NOT PAY FOR procedures for the elderly (they have in place a board which will figure out the cost vs the "years of life left" and pay or not pay on that basis).

Republicans have been totally shut out of the sessions formulating these bills and Democrats are hoping that they have enough of a majority to push it through Congress. They are "fast tracking it" as a "budget reform" bill.

Who will pay for the 850 billion bucks it will cost in the next 10 years? Mostly the middle class in greatly raised premiums and taxes. (Obama promised to NOT stick it to the middle class but of course, his promises are worthless).

What is their hope? That the Christians will stay apathetic and passive and will forget about being trampled on, in 6 months when the 2010 election happens.

Are they right about this? What IS going to make us angry enough to vote EN MASSE and get rid of these no good politicians and especially this president? What is going to make us angry enough to stop abortion, to stop the mass killing of babies? What is going to make us angry enough to put some REAL pressure on Congress to behave themselves and stop trampling upon, not only the majority of Americans but also all the values upon which this country was founded?

There is a famous story about a Christian church during the holocaust - this church was located close to a railroad, where trains ran carrying hundreds of Jews and others, screaming for help, to the place where they were tortured and killed. If a train ran by during the service, the minister would simply tell the organist to "play louder" so to drown out the cries of agonizing humans.

Are we who continue to allow these unspeakable acts against the very most vulnerable of human beings, all that different from the folks in the German church?

This is how sick these people are - this woman, a late term abortionist, describes untold horrors about abortion and says abortionists should "get honest" about the "downsides" so they can "continue to help women". This was published in a medical journal called "Reproductive Health"

Lisa Harris describes aborting a second trimester pre born baby while she was pregnant

Please watch this clip from "Judgment in Nuremberg" - if we do not fight this holocaust of human unborn which is beginning to extend to the elderly and handicapped, then we are also allowing it to happen and are a party to unspeakable crime!



Remember, Germany's problems started with the legalization of abortion, 20 years before the Jewish holocaust and then, with the election of a power drunk individual who sold himself and his administration on economic issues.

"Who does not study history is doomed to repeat it"

"All that is necessary for evil to prevail is for good men to remain silent" (Raymond Burke)

President Obama and the Pope - what REALLY happened

As we can expect, the meeting between President Obama and Pope Benedict XVI was badly misreported, even by Catholic news service. We must read the news media critically, remembering that reporters are often given deadlines in terms of HOURS which is all too often, not NEAR the time they need to research stories, let alone, write them up for publication.

While not expecting reporters to do what they physically can't, we need to realize that on certain subjects such as medical studies or Papal encyplicals, the media is about the worst source you can read, EVEN groups like Catholic News Service.

So I researched the meeting with a source who actually interviewed Fr Frederico Lombardi, spokesperson for the Vatican (Raymond Arroyo of EWTN).

As for what the encyclical, Caritas in Veritate, really says, I did the best type of research - I read it in its entirety, myself spending about 4 hours, studying it, carefully.

Unlike the media has suggested, it's not a wimpy document but rather as strong in its condemnation of abortion, euthanesia, same sex marriage and immorality as is Humana Vitae or the "Gospel of Life" but newly profound in that it presents an extremely strong argument for the need for ALL development; economic, technological, medical, sociological or otherwise, to be ROOTED in truth and morality and THE PROFOUND respect for human life from conception to natural death, and states rather bluntly that unless it IS thus rooted, it will not only fail but also, have a destructive effect on society.

Benedict gave Obama, as a gift, an autographed copy of "Caritas in Veritate", his newly released encyclical. And it DOES get specific, least one might misunderstand, so if Obama really reads this extremely profound document, he will INDEED, get an eye-full.

It is rather certain, however, that the Pope in his meeting with Obama reiterated some of what he wrote in "Caritas in Veritate".

And to underline the seriousness of the life issues at stake, he also gave Obama a copy of the instruction, "Dignitus Personae" the Vatican's 2008 document on bioethics and respect for human life and condemning, embryonic stem cell research.

Fr Frederico Lombardi, the Vatican's spokesman said "there is no need to hide it - giving the book to the President was to be clear it was NOT polemical." (an attempt to teach the President 'here is WHAT WE BELIEVE and WHY WE BELIEVE IT').

Fr Lombardi also said the president told the Pope he was "committed to reducing the number of abortions" but recently the administration under great pressure from the abortion providers (who financed Obama's campaign) stated that it sees good reason to reduce the NEED for abortions but NOT THE NUMBER of abortions now being performed.

So what BHO told the Pope would represent a "reversal of policy" however, on the home front the Administration is doing as some prolife folks suspected they would do i.e. passing "FOCA" in small segments as attached to other bills.

Thus the Catholic News Service article which stated that the Vatican said Obama has not done any harm to the pro-life cause yet, was incorrect. He is INDEED, fulfilling his promises to the abortion providers who financed his campaign.

Here is just what recently transpired in the last week:

• According to the Catholic Family Institute, the Obamas have introduced "sweeping language on abortion rights" at the United Nations calling for "universal access to reproductive health and family planning services". (U-N-speak for abortion and contraception)




• And in Washington, a Senate panel has passed legislation that would codify into law, President Obama's January directive to fund abortion promoters and providers overseas, a reversal of the so called Mexico city policy instituted by Bush which stopped this funding. NOTE: This was an E.O. but Obama wants to make it a law, so it can NOT be easily reversed by the next president.




• Meanwhile on Capital Hill, a Senate committee drafting the Health Care reform bill this week, accepted language that COMPELS insurance companies to pay for abortions. The amendment was Democratic Senator Barbara Mikulski's and it was accepted by one vote.




• Finally on Monday last week, the NIH released guidelines for the President's decision to fund "embryo DESTROYING" embryonic stem cell research. The National Catholic Bishop's committee complained about the broader guidelines and pointed out that the comments of 30,000 people objecting to these guidelines on the NIH site, were ignored (Comments were solicited by the administration about these guidelines)

This last action is progressing full speed ahead, even though embryonic stem cell therapy has been declared by several scientists to be a "dead end research" because in all the rat studies and one human study (in Asia) the transplantation of embryonic stem cells has not cured any disease but has CAUSED the growth of cancerous tumors.

(Dr Oz, Oprah's medical advisor pointed out on National TV, that if this dead end research is funded, other stem cell research which is ALREADY CURING DISEASE (as well as being ethical and NOT destroying any kind of human life) is denied funding.)

The acting director of the NIH said it wasn't a question of whether embryonic stem cell research should be funded but HOW it should be funded.

Every one of the above actions was CONDEMNED STRONGLY by the Pope's new encyplical, Caritas in Veritate which I have now READ in entirety and I would suggest that every Catholic (and educated person) do same if they can possibly swing it: Link to document on the Vatican website

The following is a taste of how incredibly profound Caritas in Veritate is:

Here's what the Pope said about abortion (in part - although respect for human life is woven throughout the document):

"we must not underestimate the disturbing scenarios that threaten our future, or the powerful new instruments that the "culture of death" has at its disposal.

To the tragic and widespread scourge of abortion we may well have to add in the future - indeed it is already surreptiously present - the systematic eugenic programming of births.

At the other end of the spectrum, a pro-euthanasia mindset is making inroads as an equally damaging assertion of control over life that under certain circumstances is deemed no longer worth living.

Underlying these scenarios are cultural viewpoints that deny human dignity. These practices in turn foster a materialistic and mechanistic understanding of human life. Who could measure the negative effects of this kind of mentality for development? How can we be surprised by the indifference shown towards situations of human degradation, when such indifference extends even to our attitude towards what is and is not human? What is astonishing is the arbitrary and selective determination of what to put forward today as worthy of respect.

Insignificant matters are considered shocking, yet unprecedented injustices seem to be widely tolerated.

While the poor of the world continue knocking on the doors of the rich, the world of affluence runs the risk of no longer hearing those knocks, on account of a conscience that can no longer distinguish what is human.(Paragraph 75: Caritas in Veritate)

Here's what the Pope wrote about drugs (and what he might have discussed with President Obama):

The new forms of slavery to drugs and the lack of hope into which so many people fall can be explained not only in sociological and psychological terms but also in essentially spiritual terms. The emptiness in which the soul feels abandoned, despite the availability of countless therapies for body and psyche, leads to suffering. There cannot be holistic development and universal common good unless people's spiritual and moral welfare is taken into account, considered in their totality as body and soul.(paragraph 76 Caritas in Veritate)

He referred to the widespread rejection of God as the greatest obstacle to development stating that:

"A humanism which excludes God is an inhuman humanism." (paragraph 78)

He strongly advocates that marriage MUST BE between a MAN and a WOMAN suggesting that otherwise can be nothing but destructive.

Also he gives a set of rather strong reasons why decreasing the population is a bad idea:

"Populous nations have been able to emerge from poverty thanks not least to the size of their population and the talents of their people. On the other hand, formerly prosperous nations are presently passing through a phase of uncertainty and in some cases decline, precisely because of their falling birth rates; this has become a crucial problem for highly affluent societies.

The decline in births, falling at times beneath the so-called 'replacement level', also puts a strain on social welfare systems, increases their cost, eats into savings and hence the financial resources needed for investment, reduces the availability of qualified labourers, and narrows the 'brain pool' upon which nations can draw for their needs.

Furthermore, smaller and at times miniscule families run the risk of impoverishing social relations, and failing to ensure effective forms of solidarity. These situations are symptomatic of scant confidence in the future and moral weariness. " (paragraph 44 Caritas in Veritate)

What he might have told Obama about Immigration is this:

"We are all witnesses of the burden of suffering, the dislocation and the aspirations that accompany the flow of migrants. The phenomenon, as everyone knows, is difficult to manage; but there is no doubt that foreign workers, despite any difficulties concerning integration, make a significant contribution to the economic development of the host country through their labour, besides that which they make to their country of origin through the money they send home. Obviously, these labourers cannot be considered as a commodity or a mere workforce. They must not, therefore, be treated like any other factor of production. Every migrant is a human person who, as such, possesses fundamental, inalienable rights that must be respected by everyone and in every circumstance" (paragraph 62).

On Poverty:

Poverty is often produced by a rejection of God's love, by man's basic and tragic tendency to close in on himself, thinking himself to be self-sufficient or merely an insignificant and ephemeral fact, a “stranger” in a random universe. (paragraph 53)

And about the environment, he states that although nature is a gift from God to be treated with utmost respect, we cannot respect Nature while disrespecting the sanctity of human life.

Love, stated the Pope, without respect for human life and without being founded in the truth, becomes the opposite thereof:

"Without truth, charity degenerates into sentimentality. Love becomes an empty shell, to be filled in an arbitrary way. In a culture without truth, this is the fatal risk facing love. It falls prey to contingent subjective emotions and opinions, the word 'love' is abused and distorted, to the point where it comes to mean the opposite." (Paragraph 1)

My favorite one liner! (AMEN!!!):

Pope Paul VI noted that 'the world is in trouble because of the lack of thinking' (paragraph 53)

Finally in the conclusion, he urges ALL to PRAY - at least to pray the "Our Father" often:

"In union with the only-begotten Son, may all people learn to pray to the Father and to ask him, in the words that Jesus himself taught us, for the grace to glorify him by living according to his will, to receive the daily bread that we need, to be understanding and generous towards our debtors, not to be tempted beyond our limits, and to be delivered from evil (cf. Mt 6:9-13)."

Basically, if you thought "Humana Vitae" (which turned out to include extremely profound predictions on what destruction on the family and human life, the encouragement of contraception would bring) and "The Gospel of Life" (JP II) were strong, know that "Caritas in Veritate" is EQUALLY strong and utterly profound in so much that it is so INCLUSIVE and actually presents an excellent case of why the survival of society DEPENDS upon morality, and ethics and a strong reliance on God, being THE FIRST REASON for all decisions even in things like economics and politics.

Mistake not - this is not only NOT the wimpy document the news media made it out to be but rather bound to go down in history as one of Benedict XVI/Ratzinger's greatest and most profound writings (in a life characterized by profound thinking and great contributions to society).

Dr Oz announces that embryonic stem cells are a dead end and will NOT be the cure!

One of the IMPORTANT agendas in this administration is embryonic stem cell research and it's a complex issue about which we are only getting partial information. The Catholic church is against this because it wastes a human life even in the embryo but it's a hard issue because the question is, since there are so many embryos already created in the test tube so to speak, what to do with them? Is it right, the pundits argue, to allow them to die when they possibly could help many people in finding a cure for horrible diseases like Parkinson's? The issue is so confusing that few know the difference between DIFFERENT TYPES of stem cells (less undifferentiated vs totally undifferentiated which is what embryonic stem cells are) or what "stem cells" even ARE. But most folks have seen the poignant films of Michael J. Fox shaking a lot, begging the voter to allow this "life saving" research.

Note: Some experts pointed out that Fox's sometimes shaking can be caused by a double dose of his medication, a statement which the news media condemned folks for uttering ("how heartless") and yet, on the Oprah show, Michael J. Fox admitted that his medication sometimes causes him to shake MORE.

Back to embryonic stem cell research, I had read quite a bit about it, but it was all coming from Catholic sources and knowing the creditability Catholic sources have (sadly) even among Catholics, I figured "who's going to believe THEM?" and thus, I have kept silent on the issue and continued to do more research.

My research has pointed out that they have done rat studies on doing embryonic stem cell implants with disastrous results... the stem cells grew tumors and killed all the rats! I did find evidence of this on the web although anything AGAINST embryonic stem cells is hard to find since it's such a political football for the pro abortion side!

Supposedly there was a small human study on Parkinson's patients with an embryonic stem cell implant with the same disastrous results as in the rat study... the patients who had the implants, so goes the story, all died because the embryonic stem cells grew tumors in their brains. But unfortunately, I have NOT been able to find evidence of this study on the web AT ALL so did not feel "ethical" in reporting about it. I waited, PENDING...

Well, folks, the PENDING has happened. The exploding of the truth of how embryonic stem cells have CURED nothing and on the contrary are a dead end research, and on national TV, FROM a respected physician, and author and ON a hostile source at that, the Oprah show (Oprah is extremely in favor of embryonic stem cell research and was in fact, pushing it on that show before Dr Oz made his unexpected announcement!).

Here is the video which the Oprah show has NOW removed from Oprah.com! But it happened because I just happened to have recorded that show (wanted to see Dr Oz and Michael J Fox) and I backed it up when I heard Dr Oz make that announcement and sure enough!!! He actually DID say that.

time is marching on - are we??

Hi anyone who is reading this. Do you ever feel frustrated? I feel like that right now. Because basically most parts of the pro life movement (OK I will admit there are a few mavericks in the crowd and I'll give their websites later) are proceeding using the same strategies which have NOT worked for us in the past - not really as shown by our total and unutterable loss on this last election.

As we speak, the Democrats and Obama are busy unraveling everything we've done in 35 years.

According to Randall Terry (and I SO AGREE with him!!!) we only have one option left to us. To educate the people and make SURE we fire a bunch of Congress persons in 2010. We can get a pro life majority again in Congress if we START working now.

As far as "alerting" the pundits, it doesn't do any good. The only thing the march in Washington did is the warn the media to intensify their efforts to smear pro lifers in the press - thus the lastest bunch of insults calling us "terrorists" etc. We got by some estimates over 400,000 in Washington and who knows how many more in San Francisco (TOTAL media silence on that march).

In other words, we alerted THE WRONG people.

Remember Teddy Roosevelt's advice? "Walk softly but carry a BIG STICK!" We should be making FAR LESS NOISE and FAR MORE PLANS.

Randall Terry is leading a great effort - please go to his website - let's join with him. A humble plea He says too, "LET'S FIRE THESE PEOPLE IN 2010". With a targeted vote, we CAN get back, at least, a majority in Congress which would go a long way to neutralize the untold damage being done to our cause as we speak.

Randall has joined the Catholic Church by the way and one thing we REALLY need to do is educate the Catholics because 52 percent of us voted for Obama and the Democrats in this last election. We need to get those folks back in OUR camp. If you go to Randall's website, Randall has ideas of how to do that.

The other real activist pro life group is "Priests for Life". Fr Frank Pavone, the head of PFL is dynamic and brilliant. Again he is about educating the public and working toward firing more than a few politicians in 2010 (that's only ONE YEAR FROM NOW). They have some excellent literature on their website. See them at Priests for life.org

If we focus in our support in aligning with these two groups, I think we can achieve what we need to do which is work toward stopping the killing.

As individuals, we each need to realize that we should be doing something activist each day. Like praying the Rosary for life. Our lady told the children at Fatima that if only a percentage of Catholics prayed a daily Rosary, WW II could have been stopped.

But we also have to make sure WE are educated. Read Randall's literature. Look at Fr Pavone's photos and listen to his videos and audios. We need to STOP BEING SILENT but to TALK to folks around us. Fr Pavone said on EWTN the other day "there are some lives only YOU can save."

A good example of individual activism is the 73 year old fiddler in San Luis Obispo who plays well enough to gather a large audience at a local restaurant. He ALWAYS, courageously, displays his pro life signs. You can read about him and hear his great playing at http://prolifefiddlin.org/

With a focused effort and God on our side, there is no way we canNOT reverse the evils which are happening now and to save those infants being wantonly killed, 9 per minute in the USA.

Pro life activism

I have entered a new phase in pro life activism. No marches, no internet petitions (those are just harvesting names, addresses and phone numbers anyway). I cannot depend on "organizations" so no more paying salaries of the numerous employees of these organizations.
What if, I think, each and every one of us, started OUR OWN activism with a focus of educating the public - we start with those around us.

For example, how many priests and clergy persons do we hear instructing people about abortion? Almost none.

This morning at church, one of the Jesuits preached on the Holy Family and how society was discouraging the family unit. Perfect time to bring up abortion because this is one of the most DESTRUCTIVE forces in our society today - not only of millions of unborn infants but also of the family unit.

I kept waiting for him to bring it up. He never did. So after church, I confronted him. He came up with a lot of excuses, everyone of which I countered (they were LAME excuses - the underlying reason was he didn't have the courage to talk about it). "How can people learn about abortion when the priests never preach about it?" and he answered with "well, here we are preaching to the choir" and I said "No we are not preaching to the choir because many people here do not know how important an issue abortion IS!" I reminded him that every minute, 9 babies die from abortion and he winced.

He ended up getting annoyed with me and saying that he "couldn't deal with that now because he was drained after doing Mass".

So was my activism a failure? No, not at all. The hopeful sign was that he WAS ANNOYED which means it will come back to mind later which hopefully is an opening for the Holy Spirit to speak to him. He DID admit that he THOUGHT of mentioning abortion (i.e. the Holy Spirit has already nudged him) but decided against it.

"I planted the seed," I told God after our encounter, "and now it's up to You to water that seed."

Every one of us CAN be activist and SHOULD be activist. We can no longer depend on the "orgs" to "take care of it" while we go on living our lives, attending our parties, buying our commodities and ignoring the need. Now it is we who need to go out to the public, starting with those in OUR lives, talking the pro life story. So that the "choice" to be offered by our administration will mean nothing because no one will choose it.

Now, it's our only chance to make the killing stop.

Conservatives let's give the guy a chance

OK, I will probably get myself ridden out on a rail for this post but I feel it's time to stop whining. Obama is the person who was chosen by our country for president. I didn't vote for him
because his stand on abortion is horrendous. But OUR country voted for him and maybe we ought to support him. And not blame him for all the gains which have NOT been made against abortion in the past 35 years.

ANYONE who runs for president has got to love the country because it's a horribly hard job, which is not that well paying and tends to be thankless when whomever is our president turns out to not be a godlike figure who fixes everything in 3 days or less.

Anyway, Obama's our president now and I think we need to remember that we are AMERICANS FIRST and Conservatives or Republicans second.

So I joined his website. I wanted to hear the news from the horse's mouth so to speak.

And today, they sent out an official announcement of his appointments which I felt was rather impressive.

First of all, he's doing something, as far as I know, is pretty unprecedented... he's RETAINING one of the Bush cabinet members, the secy of Defense. I don't know about you, but I think this is a real show of good faith and also of reaching OUT to conservatives and saying "Hey, I'm YOUR pres also!"

Secondly, he appointed Janet Napolitano as the head of homeland security. Naturally, being from her state, I'm happy to see that this puts Jan Brewer in the governor spot... she's a Conservative, Republican and pro lifer also. But I have to say that this is a good appointment for Homeland Security because while she was governor, Janet was very passionate about Homeland Security. She's an intelligent person and I think she'll be good in that office. (and far away from any life issues also...) :)

And finally, he appointed General Jim Jones, USMC (Ret), former Allied Commander, Europe, and Commander of the United States European Command, as National Security Advisor. Wow, truly Pres Obama doesn't know much about the military but this shows he is getting folks as advisors who ARE experts... I don't know this man but he sounds impressive and I think will be a good advisor...

Bottom line, Pres Obama may disagree with us on some issues, some of which folks like myself, are passionate about (like abortion... that's been the big thing with me for many years and it will continue thusly) but he is a human being, he is a fellow brother and he is a fellow American and I think we should approach this all with Christian love.

Let's give the guy a chance. So far, I'm quite impressed with his appointments... he's a hard worker, he's very intelligent and he actually might be a very good president.... and you know, sometime along the line, he COULD change his views on abortion... who knows...

As for the pro life movement? Well, it's obvious that whatever we've been doing for 35 years, hasn't worked. Because MOST of the small gains we have made are about to be wiped out. It may be time to re-think our strategy (something which many in the movement seem to not be willing to do). Mostly in the weeks since the pro life cause was horribly defeated in the national election, most folks in the movement, are just going on as usual when we all should perhaps be considering a change in direction.

Go back to Fatima. What did the Blessed Mother tell the children (and us)? PRAY THE ROSARY EVERY DAY. How did we manage to close a couple of clinics here? Going there and praying the Rosary in front of them.

Kind of a no brainer, now that I look at it. So why didn't I DO that in the first place... because you know, it was EASIER for me to work in the Pro life offices, march in the marches and work a booth at the fair than to commit to a daily Rosary but maybe that's just WHY the daily Rosary might WORK better....

Many years ago, a lady friend told me that prayer was the most important element of activism. "You know Sue," she said in her soft spoken southern accented voice, "Only God can change hearts!"

Disillusioned with people

I find, in these tense days after the election, I am disillusioned with people in general. I don't MEAN to be - I just _am_.

Somehow the church was lame during the election and did NOT specify details on HOW to distinguish between non negotibles so no wonder many Catholics had a tough time.

For example, the Republican views on "immigration" which seem to be focused on poverty stricken Mexicans who have for decades, come here, worked for slave wages, enabling places like Walmart to offer things for cheap or farmers to farm without losing their shirts, are now, suddenly treated like criminals and un ceremoniously deported back to Mexico. When they have done nothing wrong, when they are PART of our economy and when, in many cases LIKE those who work for Walmart, they are paying income taxes (because it's automatically deducted from their paycheck but of course, they cannot be re-embursed at income tax time). The government knows that they are paying income taxes because there is a sizable amount of undocumented tax money which remains unclaimed. These are simple people, family people and church going and now being treated like criminals? Sounds like racism to me (because the Canadians are NOT being treated in such a shabby manner and we are NOT spending millions to build walls on the Canadian border) and racism is one of the five non negotibles that Catholics are asked to consider when voting. (Abortion is another).

I don't have a clue how "immigration" got started but it seems to be vaguely connected with 9/11 ...except the guys who "did" 9/11 were in the USA on green cards so would have NOT qualified as "undocumented" or "illegal". When I ask anyone about this, all I get is "well, drugs come in from Mexico". They come in from Canada also though and the simple people being treated like criminals are NOT the ones transporting the drugs. When I bring this up, no one has an answer. Which is one thing that totally disillusions me. WHY DOESN'T ANYONE EVEN ASK QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS?

My Mexican neighbors are confused .... and if anyone bothered to learn Spanish (it's a beautiful language and knowing it enriches us!) so they could TALK to Mexicans, they would see for themselves. They are asking "what did we do? Why are my friends and family members being suddenly treated like criminals? Everyone is afraid now." How sad is this? In a country which boasts "give me your tired and your poor." Apparently that suddenly doesn't include Mexicans, I guess.

The Democrats have a much better stand on "immigration" with granting amnesty but a horrendous stand on abortion. The Republicans have a great stand on abortion but a horrendous stand on immigration. Where do you draw the line? I don't think it would have been "political" for the church to detail that to their people. I drew the line because abortion is killing 9 humans a minute and whereby "immigration" racism kills a few people, it isn't close to 9 humans a minute. The Mexican Americans voted Democratic because they are tired of living in fear. Can't really blame them.

Why do we have to make this choice? Why are ANY OF THE PARTIES REALLY MORAL in ALL their stands? (well I know the Democrats get millions of bucks from the abortion industry but why are the Republicans so blind about "immigration").

Then there was the story on "The Today Show" about the women priests. They interviewed a woman attorney who said how she had been a "good Catholic" for all these years (like she was doing THE CHURCH a favor) and tried to change the church's stand on ordination of women for all those years and finally got tired of it so she was "ordained" as a "priest" or priest-ESS or whatever she calls herself.

And now, she "celebrates Mass" and disrespects the Lord by not only dressing like a priest but by serving Communion to her followers (so she's misleading others). She doesn't give a hang that what she's telling them is Sacrament IS NOT or how she's misleading others down HER primrose path and denying THEM the REAL Body and Blood of Jesus. I mean if you think of it... HOW DARE SHE disrespect God like that? She reminds me of a passage in Timothy which talks about this very type of thing:

But understand this: there will be terrifying times in the last days. People will be self-centered and lovers of money, proud, haughty, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, irreligious, callous, implacable, slanderous, licentious, brutal, hating what is good, traitors, reckless, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, as they make a pretense of religion but deny its power.
(2 timothy 3:1 ff)

And what happened to HER CHANGING (instead of changing the church according to HER EGO). Just where did we forget that EGO means "EASING GOD OUT"?

Besides her misleading what looked like 100 or more people into coming to her blasphemous Mass, the "Today Show" LOVED it! Another chance to laugh at the Catholic church and how stupid we are for having only male priests. Nevermind that JESUS never ordained his Mother. Is this attorney so foolish as to think that IF Jesus wanted women priests, His Immaculately Conceived Mother would have been the first to be ordained?

To those idiots who want women priests and say the church is unfair, I ask them "Well, maybe you can answer this - God must also be unfair because you know He only allows WOMEN to be Mothers so why is that?"

Of course in our immoral depraved age, motherhood is not respected but actually, I consider it on an equal basis, RESPECT-WISE as being a priest because in being a mother you are allowed to partake in God's Creation of a new life and also, you have a special closeness to children AND Grandchildren which men do not have. God and His Church are NOT unfair. We each have our incredibly awesome things we can do. We women can be mothers and men can be priests. Why should men OR women have it all?

You see, if people bothered to PRAY or to just RESPECT GOD and His church, all of this would be a real no brainer and they wouldn't even waste time worrying about how women cannot be priests and men cannot be mothers.

(In a speech on youtube, Ms Via states that she was so religious from childhood and also aware of the "injustice toward women". Amazing how she forgets that the most highly thought of individual human in the Catholic church next to Jesus, is Jesus' Mother, A WOMAN. When I listened to this speech (all 58 minutes of it), it truly amazed me that she's a PhD and she knows so little. No wonder our son - also a PhD - reminds me that especially in the case of folks like her, PhD can mean "Piled higher and deeper" Rather interesting are what she calls "radicalizing events", those which led her out of "being a good Catholic" as she described herself to being ordained and having her own parish. One of which was when she went for her tenure at the Catholic University where she taught, she did not pass the test for "Catholicity" and was asked to leave. Wow, I wonder why? Because she doesn't know what the Catholic church teaches? And the second "Radicalizing event", she tells us, is that she was barred from teaching in a Catholic University by the Bishop when she signed an ad - from "Catholics for a free choice" which stated that abortion was a "moral choice" at times. (It should be noted the "Catholics for a free choice" are neither Catholic NOR into free choice because the only choice THEY believe in, is abortion and they are funded by the abortion industry also. The 129 member organization has a president who makes over 60,000 a year!) Needless to say, I definitely suspect Ms Via's elevator doesn't go to the top floor so to speak, but I think that the Bishops should warn people against individuals like this because they can be confusing if folks do not know any better! I could write a whole blog on HER. Maybe I will.... in the future. By the way, Jane Via, if you do read this, I, as a member of several "IQ" groups, would have to say that one would greatly suspect your brain is somewhat lacking since you have managed to do all this studying and have very little knowledge of Catholic doctrine OR Catholic History. Also be warned that you may be playing with your eternal salvation in order to massage your Ego here on earth. Is it really worth taking those type of risks, Jane? "He whose soul is flat, the sky will cave in on them by and by" Edna St Vincent Millay)

Which brings me to the third group I am disillusioned with and that is the person in the pew. Because the most awful pro abortion people (who are ALREADY WORKING TO UNDO 35 years of work on the part of the pro life movement as we speak) have been elected to office and you know, few seem to care. People are just going about their daily life, worrying about what they are going to buy for their next purchase or what they are going to wear to the next "occasion". While these evil people are opening the door for abortions to exponentially multiply.

Do they think abortions WON'T multiply? Look at Russia which encouraged abortion for many decades and now find themselves as a dying society. The average woman in Russia has had NINE abortions and now that the floodgates were opened a few decades ago, the government is actually trying to STOP the flow of baby killing but finding it very difficult to do.

But no one is even upset about it. The pro life movement has gone into immediate denial mode. "Donate more money" say the emails and letters "so we can continue our good fight" and "we have made a lot of progress and will continue to do so" despite the fact that every last bit of progress they have made is quickly being undone.

I have been told "don't be too hard on the prolife movement" and basically that I'm full of it when I'm understandably alarmed and dismayed.

I feel like I am standing alone. My constant prayer as the darkness is rapidly closing in, seems to be "Holy Spirit, please push the darkness away". I got that from Fr Spitzer on EWTN and it helps. So does the Rosary. But what is very upsetting is that so few seem to see the darkness.

For the time will come when people will not tolerate sound doctrine but, following their own desires and insatiable curiosity, will accumulate teachers and will stop listening to the truth and will be diverted to myths. 2 tim 4:3-4

As the saying goes: "you don't have to be a cannibal to be fed up with people".

Pope Benedict's visit misreported by the press as usual!

Today, Pope Benedict arrived in Washington and met our president on the White House lawn. He greeted the 13,000 people, some of whom had been lining up since 4 am in the morning, with a beautiful speech, spoken eloquently, emphasizing the dignity of humans of all ages (INCLUDING FETUSES OF COURSE), an idea which President Bush also mentioned in HIS speech. The Pope also stated that this country WAS founded on religious principles and that, as evidenced in HISTORY (something few Americans study!), government without morality and religious principles always has in the past, ended up in totalitarianism. Pointing out that it is wonderful that Americans have the right to worship in freedom (something which the small percentage of atheists are trying to take away from us - my comment - not his), he expressed his hope that the American people would live up to respecting the rights of "life, liberty and the PURSUIT of happiness" for all people. He concluded that freedom is a responsibility.

President Bush's speech was also beautiful and profound - that brought tears to my eyes as he spoke about the rights of ALL people from the womb to the elderly. He treated the Pope (who was celebrating his 81st birthday) with dignity but gave him a warm welcome. When Raymond Arroyo asked Bush what he saw when he looked into the eyes of the Pope (in an interview last week), Bush replied one word. "God. I see God", he said.

None of this was reported by the news media, obviously upset that the Catholic church would be portrayed in any type of positive light.

Instead, they concentrated on one sentence in a speech the Pope delivered, apparently before he arrived on American soil, about the Priest scandal. This one sentence became the headliner for most of the news - both on TV and on the internet:

In his most extensive comments about the crisis to date, the pope said that he was "deeply ashamed" and that the scandal had caused "great suffering" for the church and for "me personally." Speaking to reporters aboard his flight from Italy, Benedict also pledged greater efforts by the church to bar pedophiles from the priesthood.

Extensive comments? ONE SENTENCE? Since when is a sentence "extensive comments"?

From this the internet news launched into long articles about how much money the church has paid out to those who claim abuse from priests ad nausium.

The TV news searching long and hard, managed to find one priest, accused of touching boys, who was, according to them, not removed quickly enough from duties. They criticized the Pope hugging Cardinal George, that priest's Bishop. I guess they feel the Pope should have kicked him or something because he was "imperfect" in handling this situation (ignoring that the man traveling the country campaigning for his wife, our former president Clinton, used his powerful position as president to seduce a young woman, REPEATEDLY, in the Oval Office and then, perjured himself (i.e. LIED ABOUT IT) in front of the entire country. Can we say Hypocrasy?)

Finally, ABC news interviewed one tearful couple who looked in their 70's. They claimed some priest had been over to their home daily to "say his morning prayers" and had repeated raped their 5 year old daughter. She, according to the couple, had not told them about this until years later because she said she was "afraid" that her father would murder the priest (the father apparently had said if anyone ever hurt her, he would kill them).

Has anyone ever heard of manufactured memories? I for one, was not impressed by this case. Few people remember ANYTHING which happened at the age of 5 and had the child really suffered that type of trauma, she would have shown definite signs of abuse which would have been so obvious, shame on her parents for ignoring these signs. However, I think this "abuse" (like so many others) just happened in her head and NOT in reality.

The facts show that less than 1 percent of Catholic priests have been ACCUSED of abuse and of the small percentage, even less are convicted. Never-the-less, the constant battering by the news services has left many priests in great fear that anything they say or do, might be misinterpreted by say, a student who was given a non passing grade in school or angry for some other reason. And I speak this as having had a Jesuit for my spiritual advisor for several years. The wear and tear of this media blitz on our priests has been immeasurable but no one has even heard about this at all.

The media also showed film footage of people with signs from the anti Catholic group, SNAP. The signs read "Celibacy doesn't work".

Fact remains that 10 percent of Protestant ministers (who are allowed to be married) have been accused of sexual misconduct but according to government statistics, the most sexual abuse happens in families - 75 percent of childhood sexual abuse is committed by parents or step parents or close relatives.

But never shall the news moguls be confused with facts. The bottom line, seems to be "do anything which can neutralize the courageous Pope's visit and if we can mudsling at the Catholic church, well by all means, do it!"

Satan is alive and well in the news media which REALLY doesn't like the Catholic church because of the church's strong stand against abortion, an industry which in the 1980's had reached a profit of 500 million a year (according to Nathenson who was one of the co-founders of NARAL) and now, may well be profiting in the billions.

Hopefully Catholics will be smarter than that and discard the negative spin from the news media. Hopefully. Unfortunately for those who do not listen to EWTN and other Catholic media, outfits like ABC News are all they have to inform them of the news.

The group, SNAP, has told the media that the Pope's statement about the priest abuse was "not enough". Not surprising because in other interviews, the group (none of which are still Catholic by the way) has stated their bottom line is the demise of the Catholic church. Catholics should remember that "EX-Catholics are about as Catholic as Ex-husbands are married."

Finally for those who are abused, I don't have a lot of sympathy for their backlash movement against the church and the 99 percent of priests who are pure and obedient to their vows. I, as a victim of being sexually molested myself as a 12 year old by my music teacher, will admit that a sexual molestation like that can somewhat ruin a person's life in a way but also, a child when confronted by a stranger who does this, can take him/herself out of the relationship and should do so, after the first offense.

In other words, when my 50 year old, married violin teacher, the father of 2 kids himself, molested me in the car going home from a concert, I did not give up the violin... I only found another violin teacher.

All this is just a smoke screen so Americans do not really get the impact of the fact that abortion mills murder 5000 unborn babies each day. To the tune of a big profit. Let's hear the news bimbos talk about that one. Don't hold your breath! They only care about kids when they can use them to diss the church which stands up for morals which they would like to forget.

Priest dismissed because of pro life homily?

Lifesite news recently reported that a priest in the diocese of Rockford, was dismissed because of daring to preach on Natural Family Planning (NFP). That does sound concerning so I researched it a bit.

I couldn't get hold of anyone at the parish but I did read the homily available on the Lifesite website. Even from reading the homily, I got a very different point of view of what happened than was reported by Lifesite news.

First of all, it wasn't a homily, but rather a sermon having little to do with the readings (the homily is supposed to be a clarification of or based on the readings of the day).

Second, it was rather long and he rambled on and on. In places, the sermon could have been called a rant.

Third, he was inflammatory toward doctors, categorizing all of them (he did not qualify his statements to say "some" or even "many") as money greedy and incompetent. I understand his ire toward the medical profession but spinning negative stereotypes during a sermon in church is very inappropriate.

Fourth, he recommended (for some reason) two secular books on NFP which he admitted DID advocate contraception which is against church law - there is a Billings website, there is couples-to-couples league, EWTN and one-small-life and lots of CATHOLIC groups putting out NFP information so why would he recommend two secular books which advocate contraception? Most concerning about that is that NFP is NOT "Catholic contraception" and should NOT be thought of as such. It is making conception a decision between two married people and then, leaving the door open for God to override in case He sees fit. VERY different idea from contraception and important for Catholics to understand the difference.

Fifth, although Fr Tom's sermon mentioned that NFP was God's Plan, the sermon had nothing whatsoever to DO with the season of Advent or getting ready for the coming of Jesus and God has little mention in the sermon or rant.

It is not surprising that several parishioners left the church in frustration especially as this may not have been the first time Fr Tom gave a similar talk.

Can't blame them. As pro life as I am, I think I would rather hear a HOMILY on the readings, during the holy season of Advent (and I heard some excellent ones which helped me get ready for Christmas). Mentioning pro life is very appropriate but doing a teaching on the mechanics of NFP (including how one does it) during Advent when one is supposed to be talking about the readings seems very inappropriate even to some of us who are pro life folks.

My bets are, his dismissal from the parish is NOT because he was talking about NFP from the pulpit but rather has to do with many factors, some of which may be:

• That there may have been several complaints about his long Off Topic rants
• The fact that he admitted he was hospitalized recently for an unnamed illness but in a 70 year old, every illness is serious - his health may just not be holding up well under the stress of parish work
• That he seems to have no qualms about putting inflamatory statements into his sermons - those really don't do any good and can end up turning people away from the church
  

So now the diocese is likely finding him a position which will be easier on him energy-wise as well as discerning a place for him which will make the best use of his ardent pro life feelings and ability to teach NFP (maybe at this moment they are making a blog for him to write in!). :)

There are unfortunately, several pro life sources which have high visiblity, which do not check their information well and often write with a heavy bias.

Bad information from Catholics and/or pro lifers is as annoying as bad information from the press. In these days of spin we must question --- EVERYTHING....