Friday, December 6, 2013

Quick Takes, on time!





1) Advent reminder! The Church's new liturgical year began last Sunday, on the First Sunday of Advent. There are four Sundays in Advent, after which the Christmas season begins at the Vigil Mass on December 24.

So, remember that we are not in the Christmas season yet, and we need to spend these weeks in preparation for the coming of the Lord. (Easier said than done, I know!)

I posted this fun two-minute video last year (on the differences between Advent and Christmas), but it's worth another look:


My only caveat is that the liturgical color is not technically pink, it's rose. (As priests in pink vestments like to remind us, ha!)

+++++++

Oh, and today is St. Nicholas' Feast Day. Happy Feast of Saint Nick! Which is simply another way of saying "The kids ate candy for breakfast today."


2) Un-freaking-believable. Look at this, from those trying to socially engineer African families (for their own good, of course):

“The demand for children [among Kenyan families] is still high and is unlikely to change unless substantial changes in desired family sizes are achieved among the poor in general….Thus the challenge is how to reduce further the continued high demand for children.” (Kenyan Population Situation Analysis)

Put it in context by reading this:



You know how it is. Those Africans, they like their children. Heck, they love their children. They want big families and they see those big families as a great good. The western elites cannot have that, no sir-ee!

I showed this article to our dear sister in Christ, Obianuju (Uju) Ekeocha, and she (the great crusader for maintaining a pro-life Africa) said this:
They want us to have a birth rate of 2.1!!! In a continent were there is NO pension plan at all and no old people's home. 
We are 6 kids in my family and my parents depend on us for everything Leila, how can we have 2.1 kids? 
That is a brilliant question, Uju. I guess they don't have an answer, because I doubt they ever thought of the question in the first place. Or cared, frankly.

By the way, if you have never heard Uju's melodious, elegant voice, please listen to her Catholic Answers radio interview just this week:


Poor Patrick Coffin (my new best friend, by the way) had the flu so could not conduct the interview as planned. But the stand-in host was wonderful.


3) I may be losing the facebook war with myself. I made my daughter give me the new password to my account, and I'm sort of back on. I need to find a way to moderate, maybe go on only M-W-F? Or something. I don't know. Sigh.

I missed all the "Omgosh Pope Francis is a Commie Marxist!!" facebook discussions (thankfully), so here are some links that will be helpful for anyone who needs to be talked off a ledge.

George Weigel had a great one (if you can only get the partial story by clicking due to lack of subscription, just google the title and George's name and it will get you to the full article):


Tom Hoopes (in response to the unfortunate Adam Shaw piece):


And from my friend Trent Horn:


Honestly, everyone needs to calm down. There is nothing said by this pope that has not been said by his predecessors.

Can we please begin to focus on our own holiness, and rejoice that this "irrelevant" institution of the papacy is the talk of the world, and that folks are returning to the Sacraments? God is at work here, people! Count on it.


4) So, I've been meaning to get a post out about the devil. It will come. In the meantime, I saw a few articles about this beyond-disturbing incident at a Catholic cathedral in Argentina recently:


I cannot bring myself to actually watch the video of these topless, raging women assaulting the praying young men who were trying to protect their church, but there is something of the demonic that exists in such a confrontation. No doubt about it. Look at the glee on their faces as they violate and vandalize and try to dehumanize the men, who look so sad but dignified.

God bless those wonderful gentlemen, and (I truly mean this) God have mercy on those women who attacked them violently and sought their humiliation.


5) Comic relief. This made me laugh!



























And since it's his feast day, some Nicholas humor!


Bwahahahaha!

If you don't get the joke, go here to Brandon's post and learn some remarkable Christian history:



6)  Arizona residents, save the date: February 7, 2014.

One of my very closest friends, Bridget, conceived an idea to help families in crisis in our area by putting on a night of family-friendly stand-up comedy. Laugh 4 Hope is going to be SO.MUCH.FUN, and it's clean laughs, so you can bring your teens and older children!

It will be held at Grand Canyon University's 5,000 seat arena, so let's pack 'em in. I cannot wait. I love good stand-up comedy, and I hope to see you all there. I also know the emcee personally, and trust me he is awesome. Put it on your calendar, and find out more, here:


Tickets go on sale 12/16, and all proceeds go to the charities designated (check the site). Please spread the word on facebook and blogs if you can. Who doesn't love to laugh, and help people in crisis at the same time?


7) Do you remember when Carla lost her son Henry? It was a heartbreak beyond telling. But today, she is back in Henry's country and has adopted a sibling group (three!) in need of a home. Read about this amazing redemption on her blog.

And Kara, who lost Nico when the Russian ban on American adoptions was imposed, will soon be back from Eastern Europe after adopting Maks! They live here in town, so I can't wait to meet him! Read more about that wonderful story, here.

I love telling the happy endings. :)

Now, let's get a happy ending for Shaw:




This little cutie, abandoned at 6 months old, just turned three. If you cannot resist his face, then click his image for more info!


God bless you all, and thanks to Jen for hosting Quick Takes!









98 comments:

  1. Technically its not purple either. It's violet which is more blueish than purple. But I tell my kids purple and pink because they are a bit young to try and explain the difference.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Mozarabic rite uses blue. Just thought I'd throw that out there.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Happy Feast of Saint Nick! Which is simply another way of saying "The kids ate candy for breakfast today."

    Exactly. Breakfast was Santa pez dispensers and some chocolate Christmas candy on the side. We invoked St. Nick during our morning prayers before school, so hopefully he reined in the sugar buzz.

    Also, I think the fact that he punched someone in the face makes him my favorite saint- next to St. Jerome. lol If those two made it, there's hope for me.

    Carla and Kara have my complete and utter respect. May God exalt them for their incredible capacity to love and do God's will in rescuing children in need of love and family!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Nubby, based on that criteria, I hereby request to chair your cause. Patron saint of felonious verbal assault. Hahahahabah

    ReplyDelete
  5. Hmmmmm. Watched the argentine video. I pray I never have face that because is Jesus wasn't holding my hand I'd be collecting ears. Unbelievable

    ReplyDelete
  6. Nubby and Chris, you two are the greatest duo and you may need your own talk show. I would totes watch and promote!

    ReplyDelete
  7. I teared up when I saw the picture of little Shaw. He is so innocent! I hope someone adopts him soon.

    Loved the funny pics, hee, hee! And a thought about the struggle with FB, who knows, maybe God doesn't want you to be totally off. When I quit my blog, it felt RIGHT. There were no regrets. I missed it a little at first, but had no desire to go back. If you feel a "pull" it may not be an addiction; the war you may have been feeling may not have been against FB but maybe against the "obsession" you claimed you felt. All in moderation! I think the every few days rule would be great for you.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Tell you what, Leila, you FB friend me and I'll flood your feed with adorable pictures of my children doing crazy crazy things. Hah!

    ReplyDelete
  9. I love the Advent video. I will share it on my blog if I may. Greetings from far far away :)))

    ReplyDelete
  10. Becky, you are wise! Bethany, ha ha, I will! Agaja, absolutely, share away! :)

    ReplyDelete
  11. Nooooooo, don't return to Facebook! Hmmm, maybe I should add you as a friend so I can "pass the ammunition." Then Nubby can go punch them in the face while Chris collects ears. I suspect all of our accounts will be "under investigation" in record time!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. lol kat! 'tis the season for giving, right - even punches- they're usually buy one get one- now i'm off to hockey and the odds are high that at least a few "take dat's" and at least one, "here, st nick wants you to have this" will be given in the spirit of the game -not sure, but guessin' Happy advent 2 u

      Delete
  12. How did I NOT know the story of St. Nick punching someone!?! Man, Mom sure was careful what she passed on to her 5 kids Hahahaha

    ReplyDelete
  13. ...at least one, "here, st nick wants you to have this" will be given in the spirit of the game

    ha ha ha!!

    ReplyDelete
  14. +JMJ+

    I can't believe I didn't hear a single peep in the news about the protest in Argentina! It has made me wish I were back on Facebook, so I could share it and let others know. You're right that what the women did was incredibly diabolical. I found myself praying the rosary along with the men. I couldn't believe what was happening.

    Leila, were you aware of what Archbishop Sheen said about the characteristics of the diabolic? While watching the video, I recalled that one was love of nudity. I looked up the other two and realised I could have just tried to deduce it from the video as well: they are violence and division. Exactly what was happening in Argentina that evening.

    May God bless those brave Catholic men.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Enbrethiliel, you aren't kidding! It gets worse. Check this out:

    http://mobile.wnd.com/2013/12/blogging-gays-urge-murder-castration-of-christians/

    Diabolical. Evil.

    Where is the outcry from the "tolerant" and "coexisting" community? Quite the opposite, and this is no obscure blog, it's seen as "outstanding".

    ReplyDelete
  16. So, that's just great. Saint Nick punched Arius in the face for saying that Jesus was not God. And everyone at the Council agreed that he was God. So he is. Yeah. That makes sense.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Bill, what is heresy and how is it determined?

    ReplyDelete
  18. A heresy such as that by Arius is a belief that is deemed to be untrue by the hierarchy of the Catholic Church or some other recognized authority (for when the word is used in a non-Catholic context).

    A heresy has as much a chance of being correct as does an orthodoxy belief. This is especially true when the heresy is a natural explanation for something that is supernatural according to the orthodox belief (such as a man being a god). I would bet that most heresies are more true than the orthodox belief. Such as Americanism or modernism.

    ReplyDelete
  19. I was thinking last night about the Quick Takes concerning population control in Africa. I am guessing the response to Obianuju's objection would be that if the parents didn't have to spend time and money taking care of their children they could "build" wealth and not have to rely on their children. After all if you don't have to spend time with your children you have a lot of free time to be a good worker.

    Smaller populations are easier to control. Most governments would rather a person's interest be focused on the government goals or the community goals rather than pointed towards their family. We get that in this country sometimes. Where we are expected to act like our employment is the end all and be all in our lives. Don't get me wrong, I get a lot of satisfaction from my job.....but my job is there to support my family. If I have to pick my job or my family- there is no contest.

    Just another example of how feminists "twist" our worldview. I obviously believe women should work and should have an education. I think we should get paid for equal work but I also think most people have a deep desire for family. Ignoring that is just silly.

    Careful Bill, this time of the year there is a Santa Claus on every street corner!

    ReplyDelete
  20. +JMJ+

    Leila, the more I learn about the story, the more I am moved to pray. A commenter under one of the other articles mused that the whole scene was like a vision of hell. Imagine being taunted like that by demons for all eternity! I wouldn't wish it on anyone.

    * * * * *

    Now I also want to comment on another thing you've shared: the idea that families should have fewer children.

    Many times in the past, I have felt pressured to agree that a lower birthrate results in significantly more economic prosperity than before--for even I can see that this is simply because there will be more resources to go around and more time for leisure activity. And by holding out against the use of birth control in marriage, I have felt as if I were clinging to Humanae Vitae and Church teaching the way a shipwrecked man clings to a life raft, while people in fancy cruise ships and yachts stare at him and wonder why he obstinately refuses to take one of their generously offered life preservers. So I was pleasantly surprised to read of one dramatic economic consequence of the so-called "ideal" birthrate: the elderly being badly taken care of in the end.

    I think that all countries with a declining birthrate also have a huge nursing home industry (or nursing home branch of government healthcare). And the support of the elderly is seen as the job of the state, when it has traditionally been the job of the family and the immediate community. I think it's safe to say that strangers will never take better care of you than family members will. I had a friend who once worked in a nursing home and his descriptions of it are uncannily similar to the descriptions of orphanages I read in adoption blogs.

    When someone tells me he has no time to do something important, I often cheekily ask, "How many hours do you spend on Facebook?" In the case of someone having no time to take care of an elderly parent, I would honestly want to know (and not for the sake of being cheeky): "How many siblings do you have?"

    ReplyDelete
  21. Ok. I'm sorry, but I'm still laughing at this
    " ...... at least one, "here, st nick wants you to have this" will be given in the spirit of the game."
    Aaaaaaaahhhaaaaaaaaahhhaaa. Dear lord!
    This changes conversations in our house. " Son, you can't just go St. Nick on your little brother everytime he bugs you" "Daaaad, Luke just went St, Nick for no reason"
    St. Nick as verb.
    And Kat, your warning to Bill about al those spring loaded Santas. LOL! Aaaaaaaah
    And rest assured, some pinhead at NSA will happily be proving to his boss that his job position really is needed. He probably works a file that's called Religous/radical/catholic/miller/bubble/etc.
    hahaha I love you Guys
    Viva Christo Rey

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ha! awesome! lolol-
      When heretic Uncle Jim has pounded one too many eggnog and Jack Daniels and starts sounding off about the ridiculousness of Catholicism at the holiday dinner, you can raise your voice to a booming "It's about to get all St. Nick up IN HEYER!" ... Christmas Smackdown 2013 courtesy of santy claus

      Delete
  22. Enbrethiliel and Kat, interesting thoughts about the situation with big families. For Africa specifically, the answer that Kat surmised the "other side" would give doesn't hold much water. If the family "builds wealth" by having fewer kids (not sure how that will happen, since there need to be jobs in the first place, and since poverty there is often caused by government corruption and warlords, and since even fathers with lots of kids are no doubt working or looking for work), you still will have the issue of no one to take care of the elderly later on. How will great nursing homes suddenly spring up, just because the African family gets smaller? Even here in rich America, with our tiny families, the elderly are neglected, alone, and often abused. So it would be much worse there if there were no family to take care of the parents.

    I often say that I feel so blessed to have these eight children who can share whatever burden there will be of taking care of Dean and me should we live to be a ripe old age. Lots of family to spread out the worries and care of us. It's a benefit to society that our family will care for each other, and that there will be more and more of us and my kids have tons of kids, too. Looking out for one another, never alone. So, benefit to us, benefit to our children (not the sole caretakers or financial shoulderers!) benefit to society.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Bill, so if it's all subjective, and everything is just someone's opinion, then what is the point in belief in anything other than hard repeatable science experiments? Honestly, even love itself, or justice, is just a canard. We can breach any of it with no penalty, no care.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Nubby and Chris, you have to take this show on the road! Dying here!

    ReplyDelete
  25. if it's all subjective, and everything is just someone's opinion, then what is the point in belief in anything other than hard repeatable science experiments?

    The whole idea of believing the unbelievable is overrated. There are so many more important things in life than what we believe. How we live with others on this planet is more important than our religious beliefs, especially those that conflict with those of others.

    ReplyDelete
  26. So, if we don't live for what we believe, then what is there? Just "getting along" for the sake of getting along? That's more important than honor and integrity? Those saints and martyrs were fools, then. You'd have to agree. And so was Christ.

    If "getting along" with others is the highest good you can find, then what would you have done as a citizen of Nazi Germany, for example? Just gone along? What do you teach your children? Just go along to get along?

    ReplyDelete
  27. By the way, secular humanism is just as dogmatic as any religion. Do they have to accommodate me if their beliefs conflict with mine? Does it go both ways? Because I believe that these days, they are imposing their beliefs on my right to live peacefully as a Catholic, run a business according to my conscience, have freedom of speech and association, etc. What is their responsibility to "get along" with me?

    Just curious if you hold the same standard for all belief-holders.

    ReplyDelete
  28. +JMJ+

    How will great nursing homes suddenly spring up, just because the African family gets smaller?

    I honestly wonder what Melinda Gates, et. al. would say in reply. Although I'm quite convinced of the wrongness of using birth control in a marriage, I find myself very interested in the practical issues in this debate. Of course, I hope that any real attempts at social engineering will be kept to the barest minimum!

    On a related note, Leila, have you noticed that more and more middle-aged people (in my experience, those in their late 40s to mid 50s) are saying things like, "I hope I die young so that I won't be a burden to my children?" I hear it so often from my own mother and her friends. =( It's almost like contraception in reverse, isn't it? Soon someone will have to paraphrase Bl. Teresa of Calcutta and point out that saying there are too many old people is like saying there are too many tall and strong trees!

    ReplyDelete
  29. Yes, I have heard that many times! People don't want to be "burdens" to others in their old age. But oh my gosh, have we forgotten that we are here to love and care for one another? There is a bit of "karma" in that the generation that aborted their children en masse will be the ones whose children will euthanize them en masse. Culture of Death, there it is.

    ReplyDelete
  30. So, if we don't live for what we believe, then what is there? Just "getting along" for the sake of getting along?

    I would much prefer for people to strive to get along than have them dispute over what they believe. Who cares what people believe as long as they get along with one another. And the Nazis did not get along with others. So I don't know why you would use them as an example.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Bill you miss the point. Yes, we should get along until the point where integrity and honor and truth do not allow silence anymore. The problem was not that the Nazis didn't get along, it was that too many otherwise normal people decided to "get along" with the Nazis. Don't you get it? We don't cooperate with evil. Ever. And good and evil is not subjective. If it were, then you would have no argument against the Nazis except that it goes against your taste.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Bill:

    Catholics get along with others. We've done so for thousand of years. Yeah, there are a few isolated incidents where we played less nicely with the other children in the sandbox. But exist for over a thousand years and you will have some marks on your record.

    But right now, in the good ol' USA, Catholics aren't causing the fight. We don't want to pay for other's birth control.....but we aren't preventing anyone (even fellow Catholics) from using it. We disagree with gay marriage but the vast majority of us also preach kindness and consideration to those who are gay. Often times it isn't the Catholics who are shutting people out but are being shut out.

    The examples can go on and on. Yes, you will find some individual Catholics who, at times, forget themselves and behave poorly. But that's part of being human.

    We don't have to AGREE with everyone (Lord, how could we? How could that even be possible?) to live peacefully with them.

    Sure, I tease my protestant friends about how they would make such good Catholics if they were to just come home. Sure, I try to help and direct my friends to live a more moral and Christian life. But it isn't as though I am some guilt-tripping schoolmarm. Oftentimes my counsel is nothing more than a quite statement and a small push.

    You say our message is a judgmental one but you are only listening to half of the message. The other half is nothing but hope. Catholics say we can be saved....that we can be better than our base instincts. The message is not that we are doomed but that we are saved!

    ReplyDelete
  33. For what it is worth, I can't imagine trying to take care of my over 70 father without the help of at least 2 of my brothers. (The other two live rather far away.) He has chosen to live in independent living despite all 5 of us asking him to live with us. But even then there are a lot of things we need/want to do with him and for him.

    But if my father had no funds of his own and only had one child. That would be a very tough situation.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Re Post 4: Women attacking the praying men.
    Well at least they are alive. Pro Choice people are not setting bombs, cutting brakes, shooting people, threatening their children as go to school, harassing phone calls all hours of the night, plastering their neighbourhoods with posters, that's the lovely pro "life" brigade. Let's be realistic pro choice is lot more tolerant they don't set out to murder people actual human beings in the name of "life" sometimes the people they murder are simply bystanders who happen to be exiting a church along with a doctor when they are slaughtered.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Um, Copezio, are you for real? "They are alive", so all is well (is this your way of justifying their vile, hateful, violent acts)? And pro-lifers are out killing folks right and left, are they?

    You may be confusing pro-lifers with abortionists, who actually are killing people at a very fast clip and for jolly good wages.

    Let's be realistic pro choice is lot more tolerant they don't set out to murder people actual human beings in the name of "life"

    No, they actually set out to murder millions of people in the name of "choice", and they do it efficiently. Ah, tolerance. Will you be joining the ladies next year at the cathedral?


    ReplyDelete
  36. We don't cooperate with evil. Ever. And good and evil is not subjective.

    This is not the formula for world peace. First, it is presumptuous to suggest that your religion is the final arbiter of good and evil. Second, we all must tolerate what we consider to be evil if we don't want to be on a never ending Crusade. How else do negotiate with Iran to limit its nuclear program or North Korea to get back hostages? You can't just decide that certain people are evil and refuse to cooperate with them. At least not in all cases.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Copezio, the vast majority of the pro-life movement does not agree or support the actions you have described. The murder of the doctor in his church was heinous. The other acts you describe are also reprehensible. The pro-life movement does not support those actions. These are the actions of evil or seriously-confused (read: mentally ill) people. The pro-life movement does have a responsibility to keep its rhetoric from being too over-the-top which might encourage unbalance people to commit an evil act.

    But to say those actions in the video are okay just because no one was killed? That's absurd.

    Are you going to tell me those men murdered someone? Cut their brake line? These men were not outside an abortion clinic they were outside a CHURCH. Protecting the Church.

    This isn't some misguided notion that "if I kill this person, I will save thousands of babies from being killed." This is a vicious attack on men who did nothing but stand up and say our Church has a right to exist. These women weren't breaking through a line to get to an abortion clinic.

    Why can't you just admit they were wrong? Why do you have to sit here an say "well, at least it wasn't as bad as......" Children pull that argument and it usually fails. Justifying a bad act because someone else did something worse is not justice.

    What those women did was atrocious, evil, and illegal. There is no act anyone on any side could have committed that would justify those actions.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Bill- Our goal isn't world peace. Please, please, please understand that!

    Our goal is not world peace (on this world), our goal is not to "get along" with everyone.

    Catholics view this life as a BATTLE. We view ourselves in a battle for our soul and the soul's of our neighbors. Our charge is to LOVE our neighbors. Sometimes that means saying and doing things they don't like.

    Imagine a parent who does nothing but try "to get along" with their child. (Sadly, that's not very hard to imagine.) The child will have no guidance, no help and will be utterly unprepared for the harsh world. That's not love that's laziness.

    Imagine a spouse who never speaks up where his/her spouse gets off track. Just goes along with anything and everything. Psychologist call these people "enablers" and that is not a term of endearment.

    Imagine friends who never advise or assist their friends in making good decisions. (Note: there is a difference between a person who is always critical under the guise of being "helpful" and a true friend who tries to help out of love for their friend.) I've seen what happens to those friendships and I'm sure you have too. Usually, the friend who didn't get the help will feel a sense of betrayal and say "Why didn't you tell me! Why didn't you tell me what was so obvious to you."? A friend doesn't let their friend fall on their face time and time again.

    Our religion is NOT the final arbitrator of good and evil. That is God. Frankly, you know what is good and evil too because a part of God is in you. Our moral compass comes from God.

    Bill, what you described is not negotiation but extortion. A promise made under gunpoint is not a promise. You can't negotiate under duress.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Bill- Your motto sounds like, "you Catholics just need to roll over and die" when faced with evil for the sake of world peace. Do you hold anyone else to the same standard?

    When we say, "Imma bout to open a can a' Kringle on this sitchiayshun" it means, "I'm going to fight the good fight (bring truth or light to the situation)". It doesn't mean we're practicing oppression. Why is even "the good fight" not allowed?

    ReplyDelete
  40. We view ourselves in a battle for our soul and the soul's of our neighbors.

    Kat,

    A lot of what you say makes a lot of sense. But I don't agree that we are here for the purpose that you state.

    There is no real reason ("why") for are being here. There is a fortuitous chain of events ("how") that led to us being here. Religion should give our lives the meaning and purpose that has not been provided by this chain of events. One good thing that a religion can do is teach us how to get along with one another. That is a better objective than the "salvation of souls".

    ReplyDelete
  41. Nubby,

    As with the true meaning of "jihad", the good fight is the one we wage with what the Budhists call craving or our blind unreasoning desires. It has nothing to do with others. It is about our own inner struggle. Not having my Catholic faith and the Church to help me, my own self control has gone out the window. Catholicism works best when we work on ourselves but it can be obnoxious when we try to apply it to others. It is the beam or log in our own eyes that needs to be removed first.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Bill, atheists can "teach us how to get along with one another", so why do we need religion again? I don't think the the crucified Jesus "got along" with everyone well, by the way.

    And, remind me how one would have "gotten along" with the Nazis, for example? We all should just get along, right? So, how does that work in real life? You have to mean silence, because the only other thing that the Church is or would do is speak out, tell the truth, not stop speaking out (admonish the sinner, instruct the ignorant, etc.), and peaceful protest. But apparently that is not "getting along", so we need to be silent, correct? Just be silent?

    ReplyDelete
  43. So Leila,

    You don't seem to place much value on just getting along. It seems to me that getting along with one another is of the utmost importance. I'm sure you are teaching your children how to get along with others, whether that is your primary purpose or just a secondary consequence of being a good Christian.

    And, remind me how one would have "gotten along" with the Nazis, for example?

    Diplomacy would be the first step even with Hitler. It was but it wasn't enough. Fortunately, most world leaders are more easy to get along with than Hitler, who obviously had serious psychological problems.

    I say that you should think more about how you and yours can get along with the rest of the world. Do it for the children.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Bill, I know I keep chiming in with the same point, but I'd like to encourage you again to get an introductory book on these odd creatures known as Catholics not to be convinced to believe Catholic teaching again but perhaps to have the start of an understanding of Catholicity. Do you have any notion that what you're saying about "getting along" is actually nonsensical?

    If that doesn't sound appealing, though, how about thinking through some real moral dilemmas from the perspective of your personal worldview. Do you *really* want to claim that getting along is the most important thing?

    ReplyDelete
  45. Do you *really* want to claim that getting along is the most important thing?

    Yes. It is only because we can get along as we are now doing that you can be taking it so much for granted. If your whole world changed and you couldn't get along with, say, Muslims and Jews, you would see how important it is for us all to get along. Nothing else happens until people can get along at least marginally.

    ReplyDelete
  46. Nubby- "Imma bout to open a can a' Kringle on this sitchiayshun" - Hahahahaha! Love it!

    ReplyDelete
  47. "It is only because we can get along as we are now doing that you can be taking it so much for granted."

    I am confused. I thought the whole point of this conversation was because Catholics aren't getting along well with others. (I seem to remember a use of the word presumptuous.) If we _are_ getting along now........what are we talking about?

    I'm sorry, Bill, the only way to world peace is to not have any Hitlers and sadly, that is well outside of our control. So long as there are evil men, we must fight.

    ReplyDelete
  48. "I'm sorry, Bill, the only way to world peace is to not have any Hitlers and sadly, that is well outside of our control. So long as there are evil men, we must fight."

    Kat, how do you manage to say things so succinctly and clearly?

    Bill, regarding my children, have you any indication that my children don't get along with people? You imply that they cannot, and it's odd.

    Let's talk about Catholics getting along in society. I've been a Catholic for 46 years. I don't remember any time in my life (I went to public schools, K-12, then lived a pretty regular life in America) that Catholics have not "gotten along" with others in society. Suddenly, things have changed. Not Catholics, but the morals of a small but powerful segment of society. Suddenly, Catholics are told that if we don't affirm and accommodate grave sin, then we must be intimidated, vilified, fined, ruined, even using the force of the government to shut us up and close us down. We have done nothing different from before, but now suddenly we are causing problems? It's odd.

    I can't help but think that your idea of Catholics "getting along" is silence. Like, "Shut up, Catholics." Odd.

    Also, if we are silent, then we betray our mission by Our Lord. It's called the Great Commission, and it was this: Go forth and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the Name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit.

    If we are silent, then how can we fulfill our mandate as Christians?

    It's odd. Honestly, very odd.

    ReplyDelete
  49. I thought the whole point of this conversation was because Catholics aren't getting along well with others.

    That was not the main point. Catholics get along with others on well over 99% of all human interactions. My point is that if we want to judge people, we should judge them on their capacity to get along with others, not on whether they think that a man can be a god, rise from the dead, ascend into the sky, be present in bread and wine, return at the end of time and raise and judge everyone. Whether we believe that or not is of no importance when compared to our ability to get along with others of all faiths, races, etc.

    ReplyDelete
  50. Bill, did Jesus get along with others?

    And, did you see anything in the Gospels where Jesus tells us that our main mission is to judge their goodness on whether or not they "get along with others" (whatever that means)?

    ReplyDelete
  51. Our posts crossed. It is minuscule the issues that Catholics fail to get along with others. The ones where they fail are not even their fault for the most part. It is the fault of those in charge of the Church and its teachings

    ReplyDelete
  52. "The ones where they fail are not even their fault for the most part. It is the fault of those in charge of the Church and its teachings"

    I am not sure if you have any idea how utterly condescending this is, Bill.

    I own my Faith, as did the saints and martyrs before me. I hope to have the courage and grace to die for it if called to that. You don't have any idea what Faith in Jesus means. And you don't understand Catholicism in the least.

    Off to mass. God bless.

    ReplyDelete
  53. Bill, did Jesus get along with others?

    For the most part, yes. No one can get along with everyone.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well, that's strange, since they hung him on a tree after the crowds demanded it. Huh.

      Delete
  54. "I own my Faith, as did the saints and martyrs before me. I hope to have the courage and grace to die for it if called to that."

    Amen, Leila!

    ReplyDelete
  55. Bill, if we can't get along all the time in this view of yours, why can't we?

    ReplyDelete
  56. My point is that if we want to judge people, we should judge them on their capacity to get along with others"

    Being charismatic is not the same as being good. Con artists and serial killers can be very charismatic.

    ReplyDelete
  57. Being charismatic is not the same as being good. Con artists and serial killers can be very charismatic.

    Maybe instead of "getting along with others" how abou "being good to one another". It's the meat and potatoes of Christianity. Do unto others...,

    I don't know why what I am saying is encountering so much resistance. Be nice for Christ's sake!

    ReplyDelete
  58. Does be nice automatically = endorse everyone's viewpoint on everything, question or challenge nothing and let's all pretend that will lead to utopia?

    ReplyDelete
  59. How can you be so flippant about a lack of parameters when it comes to "getting along"? What of the masochist? What of the person who takes pleasure in pain? Are you trying to sell the idea that we should do what the masochist wants because we need to "get along" with him?

    ReplyDelete
  60. Bill, if we can't get along all the time in this view of yours, why can't we?

    Because we develop and live by beliefs that conflict with those of others. Instead of putting aside their beliefs for the sake of us all getting along, they cling to them even if they are divisive. Catholic beliefs about gay marriage has become the perfect example. Instead of putting aside Church teachings on the matter, a small percentage of Catholics choose to make an issue of it.

    ReplyDelete
  61. You're encountering resistance because what you consider "just being nice", a go-along-to-get-along attitude breaks down completely in the face of evil. It is simply unworkable as a foundation of a moral framework.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not to mention it breaks down completely in the face of logic.

      Delete
  62. "Instead of putting aside Church teachings…"

    So, when opposition to our Faith comes, we are simply to 'put aside Church teachings' and get along. Bill, do you have any idea what a relationship with Christ entails (think… carry one's Cross, i.e., to death)? Are you playing with us here?

    ReplyDelete
  63. So why should Catholics give up their belief to "get along" instead of others giving up their beliefs to "get along"? "Getting along" doesn't make sense as a moral foundation. Perhaps there's a different underlying principle you're trying to get at?

    ReplyDelete
  64. Bill, put aside your "beliefs", since there is no teaching under girding them. Seems the easier choice to me.

    ReplyDelete
  65. So, since you don't believe in boundaries, if an unwelcome guest comes to your house, and invites himself in for 6 months, and, by the way he's got a nasty drug habit, by your own logic, would need to just put aside your beliefs and "get along". You know, "love your neighbor" and all that jazz... right? Are you tripping over your own logic yet?

    ReplyDelete
  66. *you would need to just put aside your beliefs

    ReplyDelete
  67. Bill, you are asking us Catholics to get along with others without regards to our beliefs and faith because they seem to get in the way of getting along. Why is it that our faith gets in the way NOW more so than just say...ummmm the 60's? Is it because WE changed our faith? As Leila said, we haven't changed anything...so that leaves only one other thing that has changed. Society. You need to understand something about the Catholic faith. It is a contradiction to the world. It's become more of a contradiction in the last few decades because society has changed and Catholic Truth has not. As was said, we cannot be silent about our faith because we are commanded to go out and teach all nations and bring the gospel to same. It is not an option.

    Perhaps you can put your beliefs and faith in your back pocket to accomodate others that disagree with you just to get along, but I am not. To deny the truth just to get along is to deny Christ. I'm not about to step into that one. At all. We are always told that we need to understand others and where they are coming from, whether they be Muslims, gays, etc, but how often are these groups asked to try to understand US???

    To deny ones faith simply for the sake of getting along, one eventually becomes enslaved by the whims of others whether those whims are good or evil. You don't want anyone to rock the boat even in the face of evil acts so we can get along. Live and let live right? Nope, we understand fully that others do not accept our faith and they have the right to their own beliefs and faith. That's fine, if that is what they want. But my dear sir, that is not the only thing they want. They want me to conform to their ways and their thoughts and accept them. The HHS mandate is just one example. Today coercion is the name of the game whether by this President, gay lobbyists or the pro-choice crowd. It may work on some of those that call themselves Catholic, but it won't work with those of us that ARE practicing Catholics and adhere to the teachings of our Church and her doctrines and dogmas.
    I will fight evil until I take my last breath whenever I see evil promoted as something good. Keeping Truth silent simply to get along? No thanks.


    ReplyDelete
  68. Bill, can I offer a suggestion that instead of "getting along" perhaps you could try "treating others with respect"? Now, we will still be worlds apart on what respect entails, but that at least has the potential for a fruitful discussion. Do you see the difference between the two?

    ReplyDelete
  69. So *we* have to put aside *our* beliefs as Catholics, because *your* beliefs are the correct ones and bland tolerance of absolutely everything is what the world needs? How...tolerant. ;)


    ReplyDelete
  70. So why should Catholics give up their belief to "get along" instead of others giving up their beliefs to "get along"?

    What kind of beliefs are Catholicd being asked to foresake for the greater good? What I see is contraception as it relates to the HHS mandate (which is silly), gay marriage (even more silly) and abortion (which is none of their business).

    People are not going to put up with Catholics trying to impose their taboos on these and other controversial issues. If that makes Catholics feel "persecuted" that's just too bad.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes Bill, just like the jews dying in concentration camps were none of anyone's business. Just like people owning slaves was (and is still) no-one else's business.

      You *do* see that you're being completely intolerant towards Catholics right? You are absolutely not setting aside your own beliefs so that we can 'get along'. Which leads to the assumption that you only want people to 'get along' insofar as their world view aligns with *yours*, at which point you stop being 'tolerant' and you are imposing your own viewpoint on Catholics.

      Can you literally not see the hypocrisy in all of your posts?!

      Delete
  71. Hi Leila

    First of all I need to say that I am appalled at the behavior of the women in the video you cited.

    However, I need to comment on this:

    "this is no obscure blog, it's seen as "outstanding". "

    because it's very misleading. It implies that an award-winng gay blogger condones castrating and murdering Christians. This is not true. There were a handful of commenterson the blog who said those things. And there are wingnuts in every crowd.

    JMG is a popular blog that elicits about 1000 comments a week. The writer can't read every comment and depends on his other readers to notify him of inappropriate content (which apparently wasn't done in time in this case.)

    What if someone wrote an article titled "POPULAR CATHOLIC BLOG DEFENDS VIOLENT PRO-CHOICE DEMONSTRATION" because Capezio (who actually is a regular commenter) made the comment above? It was her comment and doesn't represent your views just because it's your blog.

    Quite a while back I used to hang out on Jill Stanek's blog and a very regular commenter suggested repeatedly that every female of childbearing age should take oral contraceptives at all times so that if she were raped she wouldn't want to get an abortion. But I don't think it would be fair to write an ariticle saying "POPULAR PRO-LIFE BLOG ADVOCATES PUTTING ALL GIRLS ON BIRTHDAY CONTROL, REGARDLESS OF MEDICAL CONTRAINDICATIONS."

    It was a commenter, not Jill Stanek, who said that. And unlike you, Jill did not comment herself on the blog, she just let the comments stand.

    There is so much antagonism between groups of opposing views, let's not fuel the already raging fires.

    ReplyDelete
  72. "If that makes Catholics feel "persecuted" that's just too bad. "

    Inversely proportional:
    If Catholicism makes you feel "oppressed", that's just too bad.

    ReplyDelete
  73. Bill, at what point should we stop imposing our views on others? Should we just do away with all laws then? Say the speed limit is 40, but I'm feelin the need for speed, is it okay for me to go 70? Those darn cops imposing the speed limit on me! Why can't they just get along with me for wanting to drive 70?

    We can't just get along because there are always two sides to every situation. Eventually, someone will have to give in. Either I'll have to get along with the speed limit or the cops will have to get along with people driving at their desired speed.

    Ultimately, it all comes down to ordering life towards true, authentic love. Now, I realize that the dangers and necessities of speed limits are more obvious than those of sexual morality. But, Bill, please, I beg you, take a step back, and just THINK through the Catholic Church's reasoning for opposing same sex marriage, abortion, contraception, etc. Please just consider that it really really is about real love, not necessarily affectionate "feel good" love, but true love that lasts forever.

    Again, all of us here LOVE THE PERSON JESUS CHRIST! We love Him and refuse to deny Him or any of what He taught. We trust the apostles, the early Church fathers, oral tradition, Sacred Scripture, most of all, Jesus Christ. So please QUIT asking us to deny Christ, it will never ever happen!

    ReplyDelete
  74. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  75. There is so much antagonism between groups of opposing views, let's not fuel the already raging fires.

    Johanne, agreed on that part. I will challenge you a bit on the rest. I have at times come very close (if not exceeded, I don't count) 1,000 comments a week on this blog. I read every one. Nothing like that would stand on my blog. Also, remember that those commenters likely agree with and admire the blog in question, unlike someone like Capezio, who is not a fan of what I write and from what I have seen is hostile to this blog and to to the Catholic Church's teachings.

    As for Jill Stanek, a commenter there (or here) saying that contraception is good is not going to be cause for banishment or horror (heck, people say it here constantly), unlike what was written in the comments of the blog I mentioned. It's not a difference in degree, but kind.

    But thank you for being horrified by those women. It is frightening, and it is demonic, truly. And more and more people are lining up with them. I'd love to hear anything in the mainstream media or on the liberal blogs. After all, if those had been gay men and the women had been Catholics assaulting them and molesting them, do you think the crickets would be chirping? Or would it be the big HuffPop headline, and MSNBC, etc? We both know the answer. It's sad.

    ReplyDelete
  76. Bill, offensive and obnoxious and (frankly) ludicrous comments such as the one you posted at 1:06 are why I think I am going to go back to ignoring you. You are bored, and I don't want to play your silly little game. If you were my child (you are acting about their ages), I would put you in time out.

    Godspeed.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. But thanks to all the wonderful Catholic commenters who have tried valiantly, patiently to make a case to Bill. You guys rock (the comments are so much smarter and better and more thoughtful than mine!), and that's what makes this blog worth it! Keep it up, I appreciate you!

      Delete
  77. His Christian family disowned him. He's so hurt.

    A just God would kill that family in a car accident or a house fire.

    ReplyDelete
  78. "A just God would kill that family in a car accident or a house fire."

    About fifteen years ago, I was all about wanting "justice" for enemies of the Church. I asked a holy Opus Dei priest if it was okay to pray for justice for others. He said that was fine, as long as I knew that I would be getting that same justice for myself. I began to pray for mercy at that point, for myself and others.

    It's quite something to say what a "just God" would do. Jesus said we would be measured by the same measuring stick that we use on others. We should all be very careful judging individuals and declaring what fate should overcome them.

    Those vile and demonic women on that video? I wish for them great mercy, and that they would be in Heaven someday, my sisters in Christ. That is God's wish for them, too. Repentance, contrition, virtue, goodness, love. To wish evil or death on others is a sick, sick thing.

    ReplyDelete
  79. Leila,

    Please accept my appologies. I have a gay son and when Kat told the story of the young man being disowned by his family because he told them he was gay, that just struck a nerve.

    What I should have said is that such a rejection should be considered to be a sin in itself, but you won't see it that way so there is no sense in discussing it further. Suggesting what a just God should do was just my way of saying how awful an act that was.

    You reminded me of Harrison Ford in Air Force One "Get off my plane". Sorry.

    ReplyDelete
  80. It's Ok Bill. It's totally normal and common these days for someone to have an "over the top" reaction calling for death, castration, forced silence etc. when defending the holy sacrament of Sex.

    ReplyDelete
  81. Bill, thank, and you need to keep something in mind: There are faithful Catholic readers and even regular commenters on this blog who have children who have come out as "gay" and left the Church, etc. None of them have disowned their children. They love their children dearly, even as they will never condone (any) sin.

    The Church does not condone "disowning" sinful children. It's like you make up straw men. You surely know what the Church teaches about loving and respecting those with homosexual attraction and treating them with dignity, and yet you still put up this false narrative. That is part of what is so frustrating about your contributions here.

    ReplyDelete
  82. Chris,

    Please read Kat's story and particularly this paragraph:

    His Christian family disowned him. He's so hurt. He never gave me a chance to tell him I see him as more than his sexuality and I don't care that he's gay. He's a wonderful man, very kind and thoughtful.

    Then read your comment:

    It's totally normal and common these days for someone to have an "over the top" reaction calling for death, castration, forced silence etc. when defending the holy sacrament of Sex.

    I told you what caused me to suggest what a just God would do and I apologized. Your sarcastic acceptance of that apology just demonstrates the insensitivity that gays encounter from Catholics. I've been made aware of how insulting I have been and will stop. But I just needed to respond to that remark. I don't want to get in any more pissing contests so I will stop (again).

    ReplyDelete
  83. Sorry, Leila.

    You do realize that the particular situation described by Kat was separate from what we were discussing in general and I expect that just about everyone on this thread is probably appalled that the man's family disowned him. I just was over the top, as Chris would say, with my reaction. I know that no one on your blog would do what they did and what the Church says about treating homosexuals with love and respect.

    ReplyDelete
  84. It implies that an award-winng gay blogger condones castrating and murdering Christians. This is not true. There were a handful of commenterson the blog who said those things. And there are wingnuts in every crowd.

    JMG is a popular blog that elicits about 1000 comments a week. The writer can't read every comment and depends on his other readers to notify him of inappropriate content (which apparently wasn't done in time in this case.)


    Johanne, I'm just curious, because you are a level-headed person. What do you think of this man who runs the blog (called "Joe.My.God" for those, like me, who had never heard of it)? I checked it out. Do you think this blog deserves accolades and awards? Is it truly "outstanding"? I found it quite disturbing.

    Maybe I am more attuned to bully tactics today, as I have recently been the target of a homosexual activist (hiding behind a screen name) who has deliberately (via cutting and pasting, and outright lying) slimed me on his blog (which no one reads, and that's the only reason I am not exposing him … I don't want to give him any traffic). It truly is shocking. I expect people to be decent, even though I should know better.

    This Joe blogger guy sounds like a virulent anti-Christian (and, oh my, I have read more from his readers; they are scary and they admit that they mean to be), so I am just wondering if you think he should be lauded as an "outstanding" blogger.

    I am certain that there are many homosexuals who are opposed to people and tactics like Joe and his readers, but my suspicion is that they are just as afraid of being targets of serious bullying and threats as the rest of the general population is, so they remain silent. It's really so sad to me.

    ReplyDelete
  85. Leila
    Sorry, I've been offline a few days. I had never heard of this blog before your post, so I'm not sure what my opinion of it is.

    What tactics if Joe's do you object to?

    ReplyDelete
  86. http://joemygod.blogspot.com/2013/12/headlines-of-day.html#disqus_thread

    "spokesdouche", "teabagistan"? Classy blogger. And read the comments that follow. It's pretty 1) juvenile 2) crass 3) hateful

    I cannot really imagine why any respectable group would call this an "outstanding" blog. But people seem to take great glee in whatever emotions are spilling out over there. Yuck.

    ReplyDelete
  87. There may be a lack of class there, but honestly, I have heard similar things from a few people on this blog, and worse from Francis.

    ReplyDelete
  88. You have heard vile sexual crudeness? That's all I see there. If you see it here, let me know. I must have my head in the sand.

    ReplyDelete

PLEASE, when commenting, do not hit "reply" (which is the thread option). Instead, please put your comment at the bottom of the others.

To ensure that you don't miss any comments, click the "subscribe by email" link, above. If you do not subscribe and a post exceeds 200 comments, you must hit "load more" to get to the rest. We often have meaty and long discussions -- trust me, they're worth following!