Posts with the tag 'Christianity'
Interesting report on a Pew Survey:
In a profile of America’s Catholic population, released in advance of Pope Benedict’s visit to the US, the Pew Forum calls attention to a demographic shift, with younger Catholics less likely to remain active in the Church, while Hispanic immigrants replace many of the “cradle Catholics” who no longer practice the faith.
“No other major faith in the U.S. has experienced greater net losses over the last few decades as a result of changes in religious affiliation than the Catholic Church,” the Pew report notes. Citing the extensive survey undertaken for the “Religious Landscape Survey” that was released earlier this month, the Pew Forum explains that “roughly one-third of those who were raised Catholic have left the church, and approximately one-in-ten American adults are former Catholics.”
Only 41% of self-identified adult Catholics attend Mass each week, the Pew study found. That number is lowest among young adults, with just 30% of Catholics aged 18- 29 attending Mass weekly (by comparison, the figure is 63% among those over the age of 65)– a figure that suggests still greater decline in the number of active Catholics in coming years.
Despite the wholesale exodus of “cradle Catholics,” the Catholic proportion of America’s overall population has remains constant, thanks to the large number of Catholic immigrants, primarily from Mexico. Hispanics now account for 29% of the Catholics in the US, and nearly half of those under the age of 40.
The Pew profile confirm that Catholics compose a crucial political constituency. But the survey also shows a sharp distinction between the Catholics who attend Mass regularly and those who are not active. Thus for example, among Catholics who attend Mass weekly, 60% say that abortion should be illegal in all circumstances; among those who do not go to Mass regularly the figure is 29%.
From my experience as a Catholic, that would all be correct - that there has been a major loss in the number of Catholics and that there is a major split between devout Catholics and more nominal Catholics (humorously, but also quite seriously, our Pastor reminded the extra large congregation on Easter Sunday that we do, indeed, do this every week and everyone is welcome to attend on a regular basis).
As for American politics, this makes for a tricky task for the parties- Catholics are a major voting bloc but there are Catholics, and then there are Catholics, as it were. In some areas, Catholics are not too different from the dying, mainline Protestant denominations - weak in theology and thus liberal/left in viewpoint. Elsewhere, Catholics are as enthused as one can wish for the faith. So, which Catholics to you want? You can run as a lefty and gain Catholic votes; you can run as a conservative and gain Catholic votes. Not only that, you can run as a lefty and even get some consevative Catholic votes - mostly in the hispanic community…but, even then, it depends on just how you run your lefty campaign (hint: don’t emphasize lefty views on gay marriage and abortion when you are speaking to the congregation at Nativity of the Blessed Virgin Mary Catholic Church in Albuquerque, NM…not that they won’t love you and be nice, but it might not be the best means of getting an enthusiastic voting response). For both parties, it will be a question of how to maximise Catholic turnout in their favor.
As it stands, the GOP holds the advantage here - but not entirely. Hispanic voters are likely to vote Democrat on economic issues, as poor immigrants and their immediate descendents have done since time out of mind in America, but they can also be poached by a well run GOP outreach program. Hispanic Catholics aside, the divisions between Catholics, left and right, give each party a shot at the prize, but even the most liberal Catholic can listen favorably to a conservative message, and vice versa (Catholics are hard to pin down…most simply will not vote for a pro-abortion candidate, but quite a few will vote for an otherwise big spending liberal who is either nominally pro-life, or very much downplays his pro-choice views; meanwhile, most Catholics are not thrilled with rich, corporate boss-types, but will listen to a message from such if that person emphasizes his desire for an end to abortion plus, say, tuition tax credits for primary education). It will be interesting to see how each party squares the circle, and which one comes out with the majority of Catholic votes - and thus, very likely, the White House.
Tags: 2008 Campaign, Christianity
March 30th, 2008
Discussed over at Battle Born Politics.
Tags: Christianity
March 28th, 2008
In response to the shocking death of Archbishop Paulos Faraj Rahho:
VATICAN CITY, MARCH 16, 2008 (Zenit.org).- Benedict XVI made a strong appeal for peace in Iraq today, in the wake of the kidnapping and death of the archbishop of Mosul.
The Pope led the praying of the midday Angelus in St. Peter’s Square after he celebrated Palm Sunday Mass. He began his pre-Angelus address with a tribute to Archbishop Paulos Faraj Rahho of Mosul.
The 65-year-old archbishop was kidnapped Feb. 29 after leading the celebration of the Way of the Cross. His two guards and driver were shot and killed…
…”At the end of this solemn celebration in which we have meditated on Christ’s Passion,” the Holy Father said today: “I would like to recall the late Chaldean archbishop of Mosul, Monsignor Paulos Faraj Rahho, who tragically died a few days ago.
“His beautiful witness of fidelity to Christ, to the Church and his people, whom he did not want to abandon despite numerous threats, moves me to cry out forcefully and with distress: Enough with the bloodshed, enough with the violence, enough with the hatred in Iraq!”
The Holy Father went on to plea for an end to the upheaval caused by the war in Iraq, which began five years ago this week.
He said: “And at the same time I make an appeal to the Iraqi people, who for five years have endured the consequences of a war that has provoked upheaval in its civil and social life: Beloved Iraqi people, lift up your heads and let it be you yourselves who, in the first place, rebuild your national life!
“May reconciliation, forgiveness, justice and respect for the civil coexistence of tribes, ethnic groups and religious groups be the solidary way to peace in the name of God!”
The left, following the lead of dimwitted MSM reports, has chosen to call this a Papal condemnation of the liberation of Iraq - of course, what it really amounts to is a heartfelt call for what all good people want - an end to the hatred, which can only be accomplished as Iraqis rise up and work for reconciliation, justice and peace. Iraqis are doing this, in ever greater numbers, but let us pray that the death of Archbishop Paulos serves as a catalyst to bring all Iraqis of goodwill together for the future of Iraq.
Tags: Archbishop Paulos Faraj Rahho, Christianity, Iraq Campaign
March 17th, 2008
Discussed over at Battle Born Politics.
Tags: Christianity, Matthew 5-7
March 7th, 2008
The story:
SAN ANTONIO — Senator John McCain got support on Wednesday from an important corner of evangelical Texas when the pastor of a San Antonio mega-church, Rev. John C. Hagee, endorsed Mr. McCain for president. Mr. Hagee, who argues that the United States must join Israel in a preemptive, biblically prophesized military strike against Iran that will lead to the second coming of Christ, praised Mr. McCain for his pro-Israel views.
The response:
Yesterday, Senator John McCain said he was “very honored by Pastor John Hagee’s endorsement.” The Republican presidential hopeful also called Hagee “the staunchest leader of our Christian evangelical movement,” citing the minister’s pro-Israel stance.
Catholic League president Bill Donohue addressed this today:
“There are plenty of staunch evangelical leaders who are pro-Israel, but are not anti-Catholic. John Hagee is not one of them. Indeed, for the past few decades, he has waged an unrelenting war against the Catholic Church. For example, he likes calling it ‘The Great Whore,’ an ‘apostate church,’ the ‘anti-Christ,’ and a ‘false cult system.’
Hagee, to put it mildly, is an unpleasant fellow - I went over to McCain’s website to see if there was more on this, and so far I haven’t even found it mentioned. I hope that Senator McCain will address this issue - but I am also quite confident, due to McCain’s past actions vis a vis Catholicism, that he doesn’t in any way, shape or form agree with Hagee’s views of the Catholic Church. My bet is that McCain was aware of Hagee’s staunchly pro-Israel stance, and that is what McCain was thinking of in obtaining this endorsement.
In general terms, I never engage in a fight with my brothers and sisters in Christ - and even though I view Hagee as terribly wrong, I won’t even fight him on this. I’ll pray he’ll allow God to enlighten him on the truth of these matters, but I see no profit in fighting a fellow Christian - however erring - when the whole of religion is under attack in our nation. I understand, and respect, Mr. Donohue’s position and agree that such things need to be brought up, and condemned, but in my view there is a need, also, for a careful understanding of the real stakes in 2008; Hagee’s influence is relatively small, and no matter how destructive he might be, he won’t do nearly the damage that a President Obama or a President Hillary will do.
UPDATE: Given that our lefties are trying very hard to pick a fight between McCain and Catholics over this, I think it worthwhile to bring up Catholics for McCain; there are quite a lot of my fellow Catholics who are enthusiastic backers of John McCain and this is a much stronger indicator of McCain’s views about Catholicism than the fact that the anti-Catholic Hagee endorsed him.
UPDATE: John McCain responds to the firestorm:
Yesterday, Pastor John Hagee endorsed my candidacy for president in San Antonio, Texas. However, in no way did I intend for his endorsement to suggest that I in turn agree with all of Pastor Hagee’s views, which I obviously do not.
I am hopeful that Catholics, Protestants and all people of faith who share my vision for the future of America will respond to our message of defending innocent life, traditional marriage, and compassion for the most vulnerable in our society.
Of course, it would have been better if the endorsement had never happened - but it did happen, and one can’t undo the past; meanwhile, we don’t want to alienate those followers of Hagee who are sincere, if misguided, Christians who do want what is best for America and the world. This is the best way around it all - making lemonade out of the lemons, as it were.
Tags: Christianity, Hagee
February 29th, 2008
Just astounding:
London, Feb 26, 2008 (CNA).- A committee in the British House of Commons will investigate Catholic schools following the Bishop of Lancaster’s instructions to schools to place crucifixes in every classroom and stop “safe sex” education, the Independent reports.
Patrick O’Donoghue, Bishop of Lancaster, had circulated a 66-page booklet instructing Catholic schools to stop “safe sex” education. Bishop O’Donoghue wrote, “The secular view on sex outside marriage, artificial contraception, sexually transmitted disease, including HIV and AIDS, and abortion, may not be presented as neutral information.”
Additionally, he told the schools not to support charities that support abortion. He singled out Amnesty International, which recently renounced its neutrality on abortion and now favors the abortion of children whose mothers were raped in war zones.
The government’s investigating committee is chaired by Labour Party member Barry Sheerman, who is reportedly concerned the Church is adopting a “fundamentalist” line.
“A lot of taxpayers’ money is going into church schools and I think we should tease out what is happening here,” he added. “We seem to have a shift in emphasis on the ground despite what the reasonable voices of the leadership are saying,” Sheerman said.
Why does Sheerman get to decide who is reasonable? This is the thing which is really bothersome about this - a politician is going to bring pressure on a religious body to toe the government line because the politician has arrogated to himself the right to decide what is reasonable, and what isn’t. Now, if Mr. Sheerman thinks the Church wrong; that is fine. If Mr. Sheerman thinks that the Church is so wrong that it should not receive any government funding in Britain, then he may move a bill in Parlaiment to do just that. But to use a government committee as an attempt to browbeat the Church into doing the secularists’ will, that is an abominable infringement upon the rights of the people.
Chesterton said a very long time ago that, in the end, there is the Church, and her enemies - and Mr. Sheerman is demonstrating this to us in very stark terms. It isn’t enough for the Sheermans of the world to have all sorts of taxpayer funded programs to promote the leftist agenda - arrogantly self assured about their moral superiority, lefists insist that no one be allowed to dissent from their worldview. Britain, like the rest of Europe, is far gone down the road to socialist slavery - but this is the sort of world that the left wants to bring to the United States; a government controlled world of enforced political correctness. You want it, you can have it - all you have to do is “hope for change” in 2008, rather than learn and think.
Tags: Christianity, Freedom of Religion
February 27th, 2008
The discussion continues…
No, not just the recent book of that title, but in actual practice:
TORONTO, FEB. 5, 2008 (Zenit.org).- Catholic Insight, a Canadian magazine known for its fidelity to Church teachings, has been targeted by the Canadian Human Rights Commission for publishing articles deemed offensive to homosexuals.
The commission has been investigating the Toronto-based publication since homosexual activist Rob Wells, a member of the Gay, Lesbian and Transgendered Pride Center of Edmonton, filed a nine-point complaint last February with the government agency in which he accuses the magazine of promoting “extreme hatred and contempt” against homosexuals.
Father Alphonse de Valk, the founder and editor of Catholic Insight, disagrees the accusations. “Wells took three pages of quotes out of context,” he told ZENIT.
The Basilian priest added that Catholic Insight “bases itself on the Church’s teaching and applies it to various circumstances in our time.” He noted that some of the statements that allegedly promoted hatred and contempt against homosexuals were taken from recent Vatican pronouncements.
Other types of statements published by Catholic Insight on the topic of homosexuality include political statements, medical studies, news reports and other studies. Many of the articles concerned addressed the campaign in Canada to legalize same-sex marriage, which Catholic Insight openly opposed.
“The basic view of the Church is that homosexual acts are a sin, but we love the sinner,” said Father de Valk, adding that opposing same-sex marriage is not the same as rejecting homosexuals as persons.
The priest said that homosexual activists are broadly defining opposition to homophobia as opposition to any homosexual act: “They maintain that the whole Catholic Church is homophobic.”
Demonise and then destroy; that has been a standard leftwing tactic since the left first began its baleful run through human history. The good father is right - the pro-gay groups, by and large, do maintain that the Catholic Church - and Christianity in general - are homophobic; inherently bigoted against gay people for no rational cause. While some Christians do go waaay the heck overboard on the matter, the plain facts are that Christianity holds homosexual acts to be inherently disordered, but that there is no sin inherent in homosexuality. But this bit of truth - that we welcome with love our brothers and sisters who have a deep-seated attraction towards members of the same sex - is not wanted in the ranks of the gay activists. Its impossible to hate someone, you see, who is loving you and only pointing out - rather mildly, for the most part - that gay sex is not a proper sexual relation. But you can hate a bigot who is just doing evil for the sake of evil…and thus the Church is homophobic, and Church teachings aren’t the Word of God, but a sick attempt at denying basic human rights to gay people.
This is unfolding entirely as we predicted when “hate crimes” laws were first proposed - we pointed out right at the start that while there might be an admirable goal (stopping people from being victimised for their skin color, creed, sexual orientation or what have you), the practical effect of “hate crimes” laws would be to make illegal anything anyone with a gripe claims is insulting. While the debate revolved around whether “fag!” is hate speech, the reality is that “Therefore, God handed them over to impurity through the lusts of their hearts for the mutual degradation of their bodies. They exchanged the truth of God for a lie and revered and worshiped the creature rather than the creator, who is blessed forever. Amen. Therefore, God handed them over to degrading passions. Their females exchanged natural relations for unnatural, and the males likewise gave up natural relations with females and burned with lust for one another. Males did shameful things with males and thus received in their own persons the due penalty for their perversity. (Rom 1:24-27)” would become hate speech, just as soon as the laws were passed and someone decided to take up the matter in court.
Just as you can’t be a little bit pregnant, so you can’t be a little bit enslaved. You either are, or you aren’t. Right now the liberal fasicsts of the world are desperately trying to enslave us to their worldview - to make us the unthinking pawns in their game of utopia-building. One of the primary ways of fastening the shackles to us is to take away anything which might give us uncomfortable (for liberals) ideas, or even the desire to ask difficult questions. They on the left want a lot of serfs, not free men and women…and now, in parts of the west, they are trying to proscripe Truth; to take it away, and replace it with a series of comfortable lies. We cannot allow them to get away with it here in this last bastion of freedom, the United States of America.
Tags: Christianity, Extremism, political correctness
February 11th, 2008
Very weak, Senator, very weak:
For many evangelicals, abortion is a key, if not the key factor in their vote. You voted against banning partial birth abortion and voted against notifying parents of minors who get out-of-state abortions. What role do you think the President should play in creating national abortion policies?
I don’t know anybody who is pro-abortion. I think it’s very important to start with that premise. I think people recognize what a wrenching, difficult issue it is. I do think that those who diminish the moral elements of the decision aren’t expressing the full reality of it. But what I believe is that women do not make these decisions casually, and that they struggle with it fervently with their pastors, with their spouses, with their doctors.
Our goal should be to make abortion less common, that we should be discouraging unwanted pregnancies, that we should encourage adoption wherever possible. There is a range of ways that we can educate our young people about the sacredness of sex and we should not be promoting the sort of casual activities that end up resulting in so many unwanted pregnancies.
Ultimately, women are in the best position to make a decision at the end of the day about these issues. With significant constraints. For example, I think we can legitimately say — the state can legitimately say — that we are prohibiting late-term abortions as long as there’s an exception for the mother’s health. Those provisions that I voted against typically didn’t have those exceptions, which raises profound questions where you might have a mother at great risk. Those are issues that I don’t think the government can unilaterally make a decision about. I think they need to be made in consultation with doctors, they have to be prayed upon, or people have to be consulting their conscience on it. I think we have to keep that decision-making with the person themselves. (emphasis added)
The “health” exception is the “keep it abortion on demand” exception, because “health” is a subjective judgement - might as well ban bank robbery exception cases where the bank robber’s “health” might require him to do so. This is Obama trying to have it both ways - an appearance of a moral stance on abortion which is actually a wink and a nod to the pro-abortion fanatics that nothing will be done by a President Obama to interfere with abortion on demand.
As for how women take these decisions - we’d be on firmer ground here if we had a waiting period prior to abortions and a full disclosure law…in other words, if we could force the abortionist to tell the truth about abortion and then give the woman 24 hours to think it over, then we’d be sure that abortions are being done only after some thought. As it is right now, abortionists are free to lie any way they like about abortion, and a woman who is in a panic can be hustled from street to abortion and back to the street in a couple hours. Barack Obama doesn’t tell us if he’s in favor of waiting periods and full disclosure - but I doubt we’ll find him on the right side of this issue, as the pro-abortion fanatics have long ago laid down the marker for Democrats: be in favor of pro-abortion fanaticism or get out of the race.
If this is Obama’s attempt to reach out to religious believers - especially conservative religious believers - then its a complete waste of time, as Obama isn’t saying anything that Hillary or, indeed, the head of NARAL wouldn’t say.
Tags: abortion, Christianity
January 25th, 2008
Geesh:
London, Jan 11, 2008 (CNA).- A British Airways employee who sued her employer after it required her to cover up a cross necklace while she worked has lost her religious discrimination lawsuit, WorldNetDaily reports.
Nadia Eweida, a check-in worker at Heathrow Airport and a Coptic Christian, was sent home after refusing to remove the cross necklace. British Airways said the necklace was a violation of the company’s dress code.
Eweida charged her employer with religious discrimination, saying that the company allowed religious employees like those adhering to Islam or Hinduism to wear faith-related clothing, jewelry, religious markings, or other items.
The Reading Employment Tribunal had previously ruled against Eweida, but she appealed the decision.
The 56-year-old Eweida, who was placed on unpaid leave, reacted to the ruling, saying, “I’m very disappointed. I’m speechless really because I went to the tribunal to seek justice. But the judge has given way for BA to have a victory on imposing their will on all their staff.”
The story goes on to note that other religions - Islam, Hinduism, etc - are allowed to display their religious symbols because, supposedly, they can’t be concealed, as a cross can. And so, translation: “Look, we’re a post-Christian corporate body and we really don’t like to be reminded of religion at all…but as the other religions might blow something up or cut of a head or two, we’ve decided that we can only discriminate against Christians…”.
Tags: Christianity, religious discrimination
January 14th, 2008
Just bizarre:
Madrid, Jan. 3, 2008 (CWNews.com) - Spanish government leaders have asked the country’s Catholic bishops to apologize for the massive pro-family rally held in Madrid on December 30, Vatican Radio reports.
Leaders of the Socialist governing party have charged that the Church intervened in partisan political affairs with the rally, which drew nearly 2 million participants. (The government is reporting that only 160,000 took part in the demonstration.) The government has asked the bishops’ conference for an apology.
Although 40 bishops took part in the pro-family event, and the hierarchy gave clear support to the event, the rally was organized primarily by lay Catholic activists. The organizers have consistently argued that the rally was not intended as a partisan political event, but as a public expression of support for the traditional family founded on Christian marriage.
This is what the secular left wants - the Church to be removed from the public square. They’ll kindly allow us to practise our faith, as long as we don’t disturb their worldview by demonstrating publically what we stand for. If we’ll just keep it off the streets, all will be well - until they arrest our priests and pastors for “hate speech” because they teach Christian morality in the pulpit.
Tags: Christianity, gay rights, government persecution
January 5th, 2008
A very small, yet hopeful sign:
Amman, Dec. 28, 2007 (CWNews.com) - The leader of an Islamic group calling for inter-religious dialogue has responded positively to a papal invitation for talks with the Holy See, Vatican Radio reports.
Prince Ghazi bin Muhammad bin Talal, the president of the Aal al-Bayt Institute for Islamic Thought in Jordan, has indicated that he would like to meet with Pope Benedict XVI early in the new year. The Jordanian prince has been the most prominent figure associated the “Common Word” initiative, in which 138 Islamic leaders signed a public statement, issued in October, calling for broader dialogue between Christians and Muslims. More recently the Common Word participants joined in a Christmas greeting to the world’s Christians, renewing their call for dialogue and cooperation.
Pope Benedict replied to the Common Word initiative in November, with his own invitation for members of the Islamic group to join in talks at the Vatican. Prince Ghazi was responding to this papal invitation.
In his reply — which was conveyed in a letter to the Vatican Secretary of State, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone — Prince Ghazi said that he hoped to meet with the Pope in February or March 2008.
I’ve linked to that public statement in the quote - and I do recommend that everyone read it. As I said shortly after it came out, it is a brisk and forthright attempt to bridge the gap between Islam and Christianity (and thus bridge the gap between Islam and the West). At that time, I also deplored the wet-noodle response a few weak-kneed Christians made to it; grovelling is not what is needed, or desired. But the Vatican holding a conference - at which I hope that other Christian leaders also attend - is a far better response. To get together and talk can often be an exercise in futility - but it some times can break logjams.
Just as there is a tiny element in Christianity which has forgotten what its all about, so there is a tiny element in Islam which is entirely off the Islamic ranch. Tiny, but still quite large in raw numbers (even if only 1% of Islam is radicalised, that is approximately 10 million people) - and, unfortunately, backed for varied reasons (some base, some just foolish) by politicians and rich people in the Arab/Moslem world. The ultimate key to victory in the War on Terrorism is for the Arab/Moslem world to be transformed into a free society which makes room for the religious dissident and seeks the betterment of the Arab people, rather than the revival of an archaic Caliphate. In this transformation, there is a role for everyone to play - including, not least, religious leaders on both sides who can come together and issue statements which will tend to isolate the Islamo-fascists and bring them into disrepute among the Arab population.
In this war of ideas, we must use our armed might, our economic might and our diplomatic might - but we also must make use of well-disposed people in the Moslem and Christian worlds who are willing, often at great personal risk, to come together past the divide. Small results will come from this conference - initially; but with good will and God’s grace, much will be accomplished over time.
Tags: Christianity, Islam
January 2nd, 2008
Tony Blair converts to Catholicism:
Former British prime minister Tony Blair has converted to Catholicism.
Blair’s official spokesperson told the British Broadcasting Corporation that the former leader converted to Catholicism on Friday night, adding that it was a private matter.
Blair was received into full communion with the Catholic Church by Cardinal Murphy-O’Connor during Mass in the chapel at Archbishop’s House in Westminster.
“I am very glad to welcome Tony Blair into the Catholic Church,” the cardinal said.
“For a long time he has been a regular worshipper at Mass with his family and in recent months he has been following a programme of formation to prepare for his reception into full communion.
“My prayers are with him, his wife and family at this joyful moment in their journey of faith together.”
There is some criticism - understandable, if not really justified - from Catholics over this; Blair, as Prime Minister, was instrumental in advancing the Culture of Death in Britain. Of course, conversion isn’t just an instant thing - there does come a moment when a person realises what they are called to do, but the process of conversion does actually take some time, and sometimes a very long time. I’m not going to critique Blair over positions he held prior to becoming Catholic - if for no other reason than I don’t want to have an avalanche of criticism directed at me for what I did while I strayed away from the Church (he who is without sin, ya know?). As a Catholic, I merely welcome my brother into the faith.
Tags: Christianity, Tony Blair
December 23rd, 2007
Well, you’ll want to - if you want to gain the GOP nomination:
San Antonio, TX, Dec 20, 2007 (CNA).- The Republican presidential candidate, Mike Huckabee, has been garnering attention in the media with his surge in political polls. However, a campaign stop this Sunday by Huckabee at a mega-church whose pastor sees Hitler as linked to the Catholic Church, could soon steal the spotlight.
According to Mike Huckabee’s campaign website, the controversial stop at Cornerstone Church in San Antonio, Texas will take place this Sunday, December 23. He will speak at the church’s two Sunday services at 8:30 and 11:00 a.m.
The Catholic League’s president, Bill Donahue, told CNA that the pastor of the church, Rev. John Hagee, is militantly anti-Catholic.
As the senior pastor of Cornerstone, Rev. Hagee is best known for his “End-Time” writing but also focuses on bringing evangelical Protestants and Jews together.
The Catholic League asserts that John Hagee has another goal as well, “slandering the Catholic Church.”
Hagee has the long-standing litany of anti-Catholicism down pat - Crusades, Inquisition and Hitler; its all our fault, ’cause the Pope is the Anti-Christ (which Pope isn’t determined - though our guess is that its whomever happens to be Pope at the moment). While almost all Catholics and Protestants are working more and more closely together - expressing that unity Our Lord desired - there are still some out there who wish to keep the old, worn out hatreds alive. Hagee is one such, and while he’s welcome to his views, I don’t think it appropriate that a man who wishes to be President of the United States should hob-nob with the likes of Hagee. My hope is that Governor Huckabee will find something else to do on Sunday.
Tags: 2008 Campaign, Catholicism, Christianity, Extremism
December 22nd, 2007
Just frightening to see this sort of totalitarianism in an allegedly democratic nation:
Another Canadian publication has come under attack for its opinions through the agency of the government-funded Canadian Human Rights Commissions (HRC). Closely following an uproar in the media against government-sponsored censorship via HRC against Maclean’s magazine and columnist Mark Steyn and an Alberta HRC judgment ordering Alberta news media to not publish any comments on homosexuality by a Christian pastor, Toronto’s Catholic Insight magazine has reported they stand accused in an HRC complaint of “targeting homosexuals”.
Catholic Insight is a Catholic political and cultural general interest magazine that regularly and accurately expounds orthodox Catholic teaching, based on the Catechism of the Catholic Church, on homosexuality as well as harmful consequences to individual persons and society of the active homosexual “lifestyle”.
The magazine now reveals that Rob Wells, a homosexual activist associated with the Pride Centre of Edmonton, in February this year filed a nine-point complaint against Catholic Insight. Wells alleges that the magazine made “negative generalizations” about homosexuals; portrayed them as preying upon children, as dangerous and “devoid of any redeeming qualities and…innately evil”.
Catholic Insight (CI), however, bases its editorial policy very strictly on Catholic Church teaching which is at pains to separate what it says is the deviant behaviour and disordered inclination of homosexuality from the person.
In Canada, if you file a complaint against some one or some entity with the Human Rights Commission, your case is carried forward entirely at taxpayer expense - a huge incentive for activists to use the HRC as a tool of intimidation against persons or groups they find offensive for whatever reason. Boiled down, what Catholic Insight did was teach standard Catholic doctrine on the subject of homosexuality - and it now is on trial merely because of this expression of opinion. This is in Canada - but it is the sort of thing the political left wishes to bring here with their campaigns for “hate crimes” laws and changes to anti-discrimination laws to include “sexual orientation”.
Fundamentally, this is what we get when hatred is allowed the free use of lies to get its way - Rob Wells hates the Catholic Church because of the Church’s views on homosexual sex. Because of this unreasoning hatred, Wells wants to lash out at the Church - and his tool of choice is a lie. It is patently absurd for anyone to claim they feel threatened by Catholics stating the Catholic position on homosexuality. One might feel offended by it, but no on has a right to not be offended - Wells doesn’t feel threatened; and he knows he’s lying when he says otherwise. The Catholics under attack by Wells know he’s lying. The members of the Human Rights Commission know he’s lying. His friends and family know he’s lying. You, dear reader, know that he’s lying and, of course, I know he’s lying. But the farce will be maintained - everyone will proceed as if Wells weren’t lying. And in the by and by, we might see the Canadian HRC ruling in Wells favor because they, too, hate the Catholic Church and will use whatever comes to hand - even a transparant lie - to hammer the Church.
If anyone wonders why I fight so ardently against the left it is because of this - because of the hatred and dishonesty in service of hatred so prevalent on the left. The American left has been partially stymied in their attempts to make us a carbon copy of Canada and/or the EU, but it is what they want, and for the same reason - because they hate.
Tags: Canada, Christianity, free speech, homosexuality, political correctness
December 21st, 2007
Interesting news report - a conference call between Senator McCain and various Catholic leaders. Naturally, McCain emphasised his long-held pro-life views, one of the most crucial issues for devout Catholics. But it was in immigration that I was most impressed:
Sen. McCain also sees his policy on immigration as an issue of human rights and security. Acknowledging that his efforts to pass comprehensive immigration reform had failed, the presidential candidate said that he will focus on securing America’s border first, before pursuing more comprehensive reforms.
The Arizona senator does not want to stop at securing the borders. Pairing himself with Sen. Brownback, he said, “Sam and I and others, understand that we have to secure the borders”. At the same time, McCain sees the treatment that some illegal immigrants have received from as inhumane. “I don’t think that it’s the proudest chapter in American history, what we’re going through right now.”
“We’ve got to raise the level of dialogue,” he continued. “We’ve got to understand that these are God’s children. And we need to address the issue with compassion and love,” said McCain. When asked about the issue of reuniting families separated by deportation, the presidential aspirant said that he favors efforts to promote reunification.
Why does this particularly concern Catholics? Lots of reasons:
1. Catholicism bore the brunt of the first demands for border security, as it were. This was back in the 1840’s and 1850’s as the first large numbers of Catholics (mostly Irish at that time) started to arrive in America. The most infamous example of this was the Know Nothing movement which, while it had a lot of things in it, was mostly founded to keep Catholics out. There is an inherent suspicion about calls for border security - especially as, once again, most of the illegals coming in are Catholic.
2. Catholicism - like all of Christianity - has a moral obligation to be generous with strangers and aliens. We cannot square our morals with any program to willy-nilly round up and deport all of the illegals currently in country without any regard to their particular circumstances. Certainly, enforce the laws - but Catholics can’t agree to the deportation, without so much as a hearing, for someone who may have been in this country for years and fully established himself as a solid member of the American community - especially since over the last 20 years there has been a de-facto bind eye turned to illegal immigration.
3. While there are legitimate concerns that “family reunification” is being abused - sometimes with uncles and cousins coming in under what should be a program to get parents and children back together - the basic concept of family reunification is a moral imperitive. If you allow Person A in, then you have to allow spouse, children and, perhaps, parents and siblings to come in.
4. It is mostly poverty which drives people to come to the United States - so any immigration reform would have to make provision for the needs of the poor. What this means, in practical terms, is that there should be a guest-worker program of some sort.
Bottom line, most Catholics have no problem with border security being the top priority - but a top priority doesn’t mean a sole priority. In the end, there does need to be a comprehensive immigration reform law. The law Senator McCain pushed - with White House help - earlier this year might not have been the ideal solution, but whatever good was in the proposals was drowned out by a chorus of shouts about the very concept of reform - from both ends; open border people and deport-em-all people were unified in their opposition. But, as Senator McCain stated, we must remember that the illegals are, indeed, children of God and whatever we decide to do, we must keep love for the illegals in our hearts, and work with justice and mercy as our constant companion.
Tags: 2008 Camp
