“The Last Acceptable Prejudice” continues

The television (the tabernacle of Satan, as Fr Groeschel would say) is tuned to a show which shall remain nameless. I did not choose the show, and have been making a concentrated effort to ignore it. However, the past several minutes have consisted in repeated insults against the Catholic Church, and a long segment praising homosexuality…

It’s one thing to disagree with a thing from a rational perspective, and quite another to level insults, poke fun, and dismiss a thing irrationally.

More and more it seems like the Catholic Church is everyone’s favorite punching bag. The York Times, The Boston Globe…most news outlets in general. And apparently, with the testimony of this particular talk show, the Church is the best new punchline for everything. Especially whatever of the Church’s teachings that [the insulters] misunderstand.

This latest episode consisted in mocking the Eucharist (a very grave offense), one of the hosts talked about receiving [from the Chalice] multiple times when she went to Mass because she was “still thirsty” (an alcoholic insinuation). I pray it was a joke. More concerning than if she received mulitple times (which is unnecessary and obviously disrespectful), is the flippancy with which she dismissed the Most Sacred Blood of Our Lord. She preferred its alcholic accidents to its supernatural graces. The Eucharist is not wine. It is not a symbol. The substance of the wine is changed (into the Most Precious Blood of Jesus Christ), even though the accidents remain the same (it still looks, smells, and tastes like wine–but it is not). Her dismissal of the Precious Blood, mocking the fact that its accidents remain, is a mockery of the price of Salvation. It’s disgusting. It’d disheartening.

I worry about the state of the world.

I pray during this month of the Precious Blood that more Christians become aware of the price of their Salvation and turn in love to the Precious Blood that poured forth from Our Lord on the Cross and made present in the Chalice during the Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

Advertisements

Sex-Ed, in Kindergarten?!?

This is just disgusting:

MONTANA PARENTS WEIGH IN ON PROPOSED KINDERGARTEN SEX-ED

According to the 62-page draft proposal, beginning in kindergarten, school nurses will teach students proper terms such as “nipple, breast, penis, scrotum and uterus.” Once they are promoted to first grade, children will learn that sexual relations could happen between two men or two women. By the time students are 10 years old, instruction will include the various ways people can have intercourse, be it vaginally, orally or through “anal penetration,” according to the proposal.

Melanie Reynolds, a district health officer, defended the proposed curriculum, saying early education and intervention was needed to prevent HIV infection or other sexually transmitted diseases. She cited a report that said 40 percent of reported Chlamydia cases in county were people between the ages of 14 and 18, the Helena Independent Record reported.

Angela Helland-Hansen told the board that she was surprised to see that staff from Planned Parenthood were included in the committee that developed the document.

Why are we allowing Planned Parenthood to help with this when they stand to profit from these people who will be their future clients?” the Record reported.

They think telling 10 year olds how to have sex will help lower the rate of STDs and teenage pregnancy?!? Seeing that Planned [Barren]hood helped develop the curriculum it should be quite obvious that they are not concerned about childhood development or education, but only concerned about how to make money in the future (more children having sex + more younger children having sex = more STDs + more teenage pregnancies = boatloads of money + funds + grants for Planned [Barren]hood). If this passes, the public ought to be ashamed for having been duped!

I’m not opposed to teaching children age-appropriate anatomy, etc…. working with children now, and being more concerned about child abuse– children knowing the proper names for their body parts is a good thing. Do they need to know what all those parts can be used for? Certainly not when they’re 5… and not even when they are 10! If you don’t want 10 year olds having sex, don’t teach them how to do it… that’s a no-brainer.

Furthermore, shoving a liberal sexual education curriculum down the throats of 6 and 7 year olds by teaching them about homosexuality is just plain wrong (…speaking of HIV and other STDs). I can be lambasted with “intolerant” and “hate speech” accusations all day long, but the truth of the matter is that ‘tolerance’ does not exist. Everyone is intolerant of something… at the moment, those who want me to be “more tolerant” are the ones engaging in “intolerance”. My opinions, arguments, thoughts, and feelings, don’t matter and are considered “wrong” so I should change in order to be “tolerant”.

But why am I the one that has to change? Can they prove me to be in the “wrong”? (No) Arguments about “tolerance” are a waste of time. The real argument is truth. What’s true? What’s right? What’s just?

The more the the world embraces liberalism, the further the world falls away from Truth, Righteousness, and Justice.

Truth matters.

Kudos to Bishop Sample

It’s amazing and awesome to see a Bishop with some guts! The Church needs more Bishops like Bishop Sample! (and less dissenters like Bishop Gumbleton! … pray for his piteous soul!)

From the website for the Diocese of Marquette:

http://www.dioceseofmarquette.org/upcarticle.asp?upcID=2123

“I attempted to handle this matter in a private, respectful and fraternal manner with Bishop Gumbleton. It is unfortunate that what should have remained a private matter between two bishops of the Catholic Church has been made available for public consumption.

I want to first of all say that my decision to ask Bishop Gumbleton not to come to Marquette had absolutely nothing to do with the group who invited him to speak, Marquette Citizens for Peace and Justice, nor with the topic of his publicized speech, since the Church is a strong advocate of peace and justice. I am sorry for the negative impact this has had on those planning this event.

There is a common courtesy usually observed between bishops whereby when one bishop wishes to enter into another bishop’s diocese to minister or make a public speech or appearance, he informs the local bishop ahead of time and seeks his approval. Only on October 9 did I receive any communication from Bishop Gumbleton, after this situation had already become public.

As the Bishop of the Diocese of Marquette, I am the chief shepherd and teacher of the Catholic faithful of the Upper Peninsula entrusted to my pastoral care. As such I am charged with the grave responsibility to keep clearly before my people the teachings of the Catholic Church on matters of faith and morals. Given Bishop Gumbleton’s very public position on certain important matters of Catholic teaching, specifically with regard to homosexuality and the ordination of women to the priesthood, it was my judgment that his presence in Marquette would not be helpful to me in fulfilling my responsibility.

I realize that these were not the topics upon which Bishop Gumbleton was planning to speak. However, I was concerned about his well-known and public stature and position on these issues and my inability to keep these matters from coming up in discussion. In order that no one becomes confused, everyone under my pastoral care must receive clear teaching on these important doctrines.

I offer my prayers for Bishop Gumbleton and for all those who have been negatively affected by this unfortunate situation.”

-End-

Tony Blair… did he convert or get stuck in the cafeteria?

Blair questions papal gay policy

The latest in the BBC news has Tony Blair questioning the Church’s stance (not merely Pope Benedict XVI, don’t let them fool you into such slippery thinking) on homosexuality. (FYI, here is what the Holy Father said in context)

It really irks me how people try to save face by playing down Church teachings, or worse, brushing them off as antiquated ideas that are due for an update. Especially a covert. For heaven’s sake, don’t convert if you don’t believe! Don’t say “Amen” if you don’t mean it. Or, as James puts it, “let your yes mean yes and your no mean no”. You don’t get to pick and choose what to believe by what is convenient for you, or what you happen to feel like abiding by. It’s either true or it isn’t.

Mr. Blair sets up this false dividing line between “the Church” (i.e. the Church leaders, he means) and “the Church” (i.e., some liberal all-embracing idea for the laity… there IS a mystical sense of the Church, but I highly doubt Mr. Blair knows or refers to this). The Church [leaders] say one thing, but the Church [laity] believe another, according to Mr. Blair. Well, here’s a NEWSFLASH: The Catholic Church has not ever been, nor will she ever be, a democracy. So that leaves Mr. Blair with two options: suck it up and embrace the wisdom of the Church after some serious study in which he discovers the true rationale for the Church’s teaching(s), or continue to make himself look foolish by complaining about something he can’t change.