Wednesday, December 03, 2008
But having said that, it's not like it's a great place either. What I've found in four years there, is that aside from the opportunity to go to Mass, there is little to identify the school as something special. In fact, the local public school seems to be more family-focused than our Catholic school! A couple of examples:
We always start on a Wednesday. For decades, those first three days were half-days. But for the last two, they've switched to full days. I don't care so much that they changed it, as I do why they changed it. The principal made the decision because she had so many parents complaining that they had to rearrange work schedules to accomodate their own children. Now, I understand that in some families, both parents have to work. But this is just one more way that we've changed our identity to accomodate those with secular values. While some of the families have to do it to get by, many others just do it drive a Lexus, or "keep my sanity".
Another thing is the way that parents are pushed away from the school. At the public school, parent-helpers are invited in to assist the teachers with class parties and projects. Not at our Catholic school! Parties are off limits for parents. One teacher explained that some of the kids would get upset that their mom had to work and couldn't be there. So we don't let any come?! At what point is the kid going to have to understand that either mom is making a sacrifice to serve the family in another way, or that she just would prefer the extra cash that comes in from that second job? We make sacrifices so that my wife can stay home, partly to be available for these kinds of things. As a convert, I thought we were trying to live out traditional, Catholic values. And again, I make a distinction between those that must work and those that choose to.
At a recent "Mother's Club" meeting, the audience was reminded that Christmas break would be a little longer this year, a full two weeks. The response? A collective groan. I don't get it. What kind of mother wouldnt' want to have that extra time with their children? Instead, they sit around and complain about it. These are the same moms who want to be "involved" in everything, and compete to sign up for room mother, and have their name linked with as much as they can, but when it comes down to it, they only want the school to offer activities that suit their schedule, and complain when they have to slip back into the role of parent. It's funny, only a few are available to assist with the Reading Program, but when a field trip pops up, all of a sudden everyone is able to get off of work and expects that they and their clicque will be the chosen few who get to chaperone.
I've been on the parish Board of Education for five years now, but that's just an exercise in futility. In two years as Chair, I couldn't enlist another soul to help make some minor changes. The principal runs the school, which she usually does a good job of. Kind of like a benevolent dictator. But that just means there's no accountability. The pastor thinks she does a great job, so he doesn't seem to question anything.
I guess I just need to get over it, or be more patient. And believe me, I try. But it's just when I see some of these simple, basic things - about putting family first, or not watering down sacramental prep - I just have a hard time with it. Maybe that's just something converts have to learn to accept. I hope not.
Tuesday, December 02, 2008
A University of Toledo administrator who was fired after criticizing gay rights in a newspaper column is suing the school for violating her free speech rights.
Dixon wrote in a newspaper column in April that gay rights can't be compared to civil rights because homosexuality is a choice. The university says Dixon's statements damaged her ability to perform her job.
So how exactly does this affect her ability to do her job? Is it that she's no longer accepted by her HR peers, the same people who have pushed this agenda in universities and corporations across America?
What they feel the need to silence is the truth. She's absolutely correct - this is not a civil rights struggle. Blacks at that time were denied basic legal protections. Homosexuals are not denied any rights whatsoever. This whole push for homosexual "marriage" is a joke. You have a loud minority who don't understand what marriage is, or why it is recognized by the state. Even though they can't produce the benefits that a marriage provides to society, they want it anyway. Don't know what it is, but I gotta have it!
Toddlers handle rejection better than these activists; look at the Prop 8 protests around the country. (And notice that I say activists, not homosexuals. Most of the fuss is coming from straight people with a deeply-embedded guilt complex that has to manifest itself in some way. Well-to-do white liberals find all kinds of ways to express this. Can you count them?)
Monday, December 01, 2008
Burress shot himself in the right thigh in the VIP section of the Latin Quarter
nightclub about 1 a.m. Saturday, police said. He did not have a permit to carry
a handgun in New York.
Why would he NEED a permit to carry a handgun? First of all, if you don't think you can go out and enjoy an evening without fearing that some situation might arise that will require you to have your piece with you, you're probably not planning well. But beyond that, the man makes millions. Why wouldn't he just HIRE a bodyguard who can handle those kinds of things? I mean, was he really planning on shooting someone himself if the opportunity, er, need arose?
And I love his lawyer. Remind me to call that guy if I ever do something that stupid. He says:
"He is standing tall. He is a mature adult," said Benjamin Brafman, his defense lawyer.
Dude, last time I checked, mature adults don't carry loaded guns in their pockets to go to the club. At the very least, wouldn't a mature adult make sure the safety was on? I can't imagine him doing any jail time (BTW, isn't a $100,000 bond a little much in this case? Where's he gonna hide?), but it will be interesting to see how this plays out.
Update: The Giants just suspended him for four games, which is the rest of the regular season. That's awkward. Didn't he kind of already punish himself? You know, when he took that bullet in the leg? From that gun he had in his pocket?
Thursday, November 20, 2008
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
President-elect Barack Obama,
As American Catholics, we, the undersigned, would like to reiterate the congratulations given to you by Pope Benedict XVI. We will be praying for you as you undertake the office of President of the United States.
Wishing you much good will, we hope we will be able to work with you, your administration, and our fellow citizens to move beyond the gridlock which has often harmed our great nation in recent years. Too often, partisan politics has hampered our response to disaster and misfortune. As a result of this, many Americans have become resentful, blaming others for what happens instead of realizing our own responsibilities. We face serious problems as a people, and if we hope to overcome the crises we face in today’s world, we should make a serious effort to set aside the bitterness in our hearts, to listen to one another, and to work with one another.
One of the praiseworthy elements of your campaign has been the call to end such partisanship. You have stated a desire to engage others in dialogue. With you, we believe that real achievement comes not through the defamation of one’s opponents, nor by amassing power and using it merely as a tool for one’s own individual will. We also believe dialogue is essential. We too wish to appeal to the better nature of the nation. We want to encourage people to work together for the common good. Such action can and will engender trust. It may change the hearts of many, and it might alter the path of our nation, shifting to a road leading to a better America. We hope this theme of your campaign is realized in the years ahead.
One of the critical issues which currently divides our nation is abortion. As you have said, no one is for abortion, and you would agree to limit late-term abortions as long as any bill which comes your way allows for exceptions to those limits, such as when the health of the mother is in jeopardy. You have also said you would like to work on those social issues which cause women to feel as if they have a need for an abortion, so as to reduce the actual number of abortions being performed in the United States.
Indeed, you said in your third presidential debate, “But there surely is some common ground when both those who believe in choice and those who are opposed to abortion can come together and say, ‘We should try to prevent unintended pregnancies by providing appropriate education to our youth, communicating that sexuality is sacred and that they should not be engaged in cavalier activity, and providing options for adoption, and helping single mothers if they want to choose to keep the baby.’”
As men and women who oppose abortion and embrace a pro-life ethic, we want to commend your willingness to engage us in dialogue, and we ask that you live up to your promise, and engage us on this issue.
There is much we can do together. There is much that we can do to help women who find themselves in difficult situations so they will not see abortion as their only option. There is much which we can do to help eliminate those unwanted pregnancies which lead to abortion.
One of your campaign promises is of grave concern to many pro-life citizens. On January 22, 2008, the 35th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, when speaking of the current right of women in America to have abortions, you said, “And I will continue to defend this right by passing the Freedom of Choice Act as president.”
The Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA) might well undermine your engagement of pro-life Americans on the question of abortion. It might hamper any effort on your part to work with us to limit late-term abortions. We believe FOCA does more than allow for choice. It may force the choice of a woman upon others, and make them morally complicit in such choice. One concern is that it would force doctors and hospitals which would otherwise choose not to perform abortions to do so, even if it went against their sacred beliefs. Such a law would undermine choice, and might begin the process by which abortion is enforced as a preferred option, instead of being one possible choice for a doctor to practice.
It is because of such concern we write. We urge you to engage us, and to dialogue with us, and to do so before you consider signing this legislation. Let us reason together and search out the implications of FOCA. Let us carefully review it and search for contradictions of those positions which we hold in common.If FOCA can be postponed for the present, and serious dialogue begun with us, as well as with those who disagree with us, you will demonstrate that your administration will indeed be one that rises above partisanship, and will be one of change. This might well be the first step toward resolving an issue which tears at the fabric of our churches, our political process, our families, our very society, and that causes so much hardship and heartache in pregnant women.
Likewise, you have also recently stated you might over-ride some of President G.W. Bush’s executive orders. This is also a concern to us. We believe doing so without having a dialogue with the American people would undermine the political environment you would like to establish. Among those issues which concern us are those which would use taxpayer money to support actions we find to be morally questionable, such as embryonic stem cell research, or to fund international organizations that would counsel women to have an abortion (this would make abortion to be more than a mere choice, but an encouraged activity).
Consider, sir, your general promise to the American people and set aside particular promises to a part of your constituency. This would indicate that you plan to reject politics as usual. This would indeed be a change we need.
Deal W. Hudson
Mark J. Coughlan
Rev. James A. Nowack
Craig D. Baker
Joshua D. Brumfield
Ashley M. Brumfield
Michael J. Iafrate
Henry C Karlson III
Adam P Verslype
Michael J. Deem
Katerina M. Deem
Anthony M. Annett
Thomas Greenwell PhD
Robert C. Koerpel
New, Online Signatures:
Deacon Keith Fournier
Fr. Phil Bloom
Robert King, OP.
Peter HalabuKelly Clark
Fr. John Zuhlsdorf
Ken Hallenius III
Timothy M. Mason
John Anthony D’Arpino
Mary C. Borneman
Fr. Loren W. Gonzales
Adam Mateo Fierro
Esther C. Gefroh
Joe A. Potillor, Jr.
Daniel H. Conway
Brandon Charles Markey
Nick van Zee
Brian T. Coughlin
Anthony F. Miller
Thomas L. McDonald
Joseph S. Arena
Nicholas J. Hardesty
The Hopeful Populist
Gift of Self
Adam V’s Blog
Thoughts of a Regular Guy
Against the Grain
Defending My Bean Field
Bound and Free
Suicide of the West
Pro Ecclesia * Pro Familia * Pro Civitate
One Nation Under God
The Cranky Conservative
Astonished, Yet at Home!
Laughter and Humility
Catholic and Enjoying It
The Catholic Liberal
The Lady in the Pew
Pansy and Peony
Confessions of a Liberal Traditionalist
James B. Janknegt’s Weblog
What Does the Prayer Really Say
100% of Your RDA of Ken
Yellow Blog Journalism
The Black Biretta
The Rockin’ Traddy
The Holy Cookie
Overheard in the Sacristy
The School of Mary
The Practicing Catholic
A Catholic Mom in Hawaii
This Old Church: Behind Enemy Lines
The Lazy Disciple
The Weight of Glory
Catholic News Agency
Friday, November 14, 2008
Here's how you can tell the campaign is over and the transition has begun: Barack Obama's aides now wear suits and ties, their desks are in the Federal Building on 6th Street in Washington — and Clintonites are everywhere. [snip]
Thirty-one of the 47 people so far named to transition or staff posts have ties to the Clinton administration, including all but one of the members of his 12-person Transition Advisory Board and both of his White House staff choices.
I guess if by change he meant a change back to the 90's, then he was right. Within the first year, a lot of people are going to fuming that they've been sold a bill of goods. Obama is not going to deliver on his promis of change. HE CAN'T. He never took the time to tell anyone what he talking about. All he kept going on about was change, and hope, and things being better. He was never so foolish as to define it. That may work well for his Socialist heroes, but thank God that in this country we get an election every four years. And don't forget mid-term elections between that. Change is coming alright...
Letters containing a suspicious white powder were sent Thursday to Mormon temples in Los Angeles and Salt Lake City that were the sites of protests against the church's support of California's gay marriage ban.
The temple in downtown Salt Lake City, where the church is based, received a similar envelope containing a white powder that spilled onto a clerk's hand.
Aren't these the people demanding tolerance? Care to show any evidence of it? As always, the only view to be tolerated is the liberal agenda. The rest of us are closed-minded bigots. My favorite line comes at the end:
Authorities are looking into several theories on who sent the letters and why.
Seriously? Not sure why? My hope is that's meant to mean which particular homosexual activist group did it. They need someone to lash out against, and the Mormons seem to be the target of choice. What about Obama's mandate of "change"? Doesn't that apply to them? Doesn't the democratic will of the people count for anything?
These people are driven by hatred. There is nothing that is beneath them in this fight. I predict there is more of this to come.
Thursday, November 13, 2008
No Obama supporter can truly call themselves Catholic. This goes beyond any partisan differences. Obama is a staunch and unrepentant supporter of abortion on demand. Anyone who supports that has, in fact, rejected the teachings of the Catholic Church. Why then would they want to receive Communion? If for no other reason than that it's a visible sign of their unity with the teachings of the Church? I would think they'd want to be as far from that as possible.
The only reason I can imagine is that it's a cultural thing. They grew up Catholic, their family is Catholic, and they'll always see themselves that way. But the plain fact is that they're not. I humbly suggest that they do the honroable thing, and leave the Church. There are plenty of Protestant denominations that would match their thinking. Some even have an imitation of Holy Communion so it can still "feel" like home. (Isn't that what's really important, anyway?)
I'd hate to see anyone walk away from the grace found in the Catholic Church, but they've already done it. I just ask them to be honest about it. Don't be so arrogant as to think you're going to change 2000 years of consistent Church teaching to suit your twisted agenda.
Wednesday, November 05, 2008
A first-of-its-kind measure in Colorado, which was defeated soundly, would have
defined life as beginning at conception.
The biological sciences have known and taught for decades that life begins at conception. How can a civil law possibly refute that? I'm trying to keep up here: science is infallible in describing the origins of the universe, but not in defining the origin of a person? Am I missing something here?
Well, he got it. Now the free ride ends. He's going to have to take a stand on something besides killing babies (although he'll stick with that stand). I think Democrats are going to see that he's not the panacea they hoped for. Only Jesus is, yet they still seem to be a little confused on identity there. After the Democratic hangover wears off, they're going have to ask themselves tough questions about why their man hasn't delivered on his promises, on their expectations. There will be plenty of excuses, plenty of continued Bush-blaming, but the bottom line is that the change they seek will not occur. The exception of course is on life issues. Regrettably, there will be plenty of losers in that regard.
Blacks in particular are giddy that a black man has finally been elected. But what happens when they realize that he isn't going to help them? That his welfare policies will continue to keep the ghettos full. That his abortion policies will continue to kill their future, literally. That those same policies will encourage the view of women as objects.
The disappoint will come. But none of the blame will be his. Yes, we have a black president. But do we have a good one? I don't care what the President looks like on the outside. I'm concerned with what he's made of inside.
P.S. - Why did we never see this kind of support for Alan Keyes? Keyes would make an excellent president, regardless of the color of his skin.
Friday, October 31, 2008
There is an excellent article at the St. Therese Parish website by their Parochial Vicar, Fr. Paul Berschied on the importance of pro-life issues in the election. Here's an excerpt:
We sometimes forget that Mozart was the product of woman of ill-repute and that~~Fr. Paul Berchied
Oprah Winfrey is a product of rape. These two individuals are certainly great
successes in human terms and they are not the only ones that can be cited. Have
we killed by abortion the person who would have cured cancer or developed an
alternative fuel for industry or found the cure for some other disease, or
brought about a modern invention that would help the progress of human
(H/T: St. Therese Parish)
Friday, October 24, 2008
~~Edward Cardinal Egan
Thursday, October 23, 2008
~~Frank Sheed, Theology and Sanity
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
Thursday, October 09, 2008
Wednesday, October 08, 2008
~~From "Becoming a Real Man of God", by Fr. Roger J. Landry. The full article can be read at http://www.kofc.org/un/eb/en/resources/cis/CIS322.pdf
(The entire thing is only 26 pages and is written simply, powerfully, and without compromise for the truth.)
Wednesday, August 13, 2008
A British team of "scientists" finds one flaw with the Pill:
Birth-control pills could screw up a woman's ability to sniff out a compatible mate, a new study finds.
While several factors can send a woman swooning, including big brains and brawn, body odor can be critical in the final decision, the researchers say. That's because beneath a woman's flowery fragrance or a guy's musk the body sends out aromatic molecules that indicate genetic compatibility.
Seriously? Look, if body odor attracted a mate, my wife never would have spoken to me in the first place! Never mind the Horomone Havoc, the breast cancer link that no one seems to want to talk about, or that it encourages sex to be considered a recreational activity. No, the real problem is that it might mess up her sniffer.
Read all the nonsense HERE.
Monday, July 21, 2008
As much as I love wasting time on the Internet, it's nice to see something this important and historic going online. Even if it is likely to be over my head!
The site goes live on July 24th, but they do have an intro up. LINK
You can read the Reuters article HERE.
Friday, June 20, 2008
Wrong on so many levels. The article mentions that the parents are divorced and that dad has legal custody. However, it doesn't mention who helped the girl find a lawyer. Mom? Her school? (Wouldn't be surprised!)
Liberals scoff at the notion of "judicial tyranny", but this is it - defined. This guy now has some moron telling him how to discipline his daughter. He wasn't beating her, or denying food. He just said Enough. No trip. And the State tells him no. You can't do that. Apparently it's in Canada's national interest to see this girl go on a school trip.
America may be a world leader, but we're a follower in judicial matters. If it hasn't already happened here, it won't be long. Might as well just give them want they want and save yourself the legal expenses.
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
Like most of you, I'm disgusted by the legal recognition of "gay" so-called marriage in California and the consequences that the rest of the country are soon going to have to deal with. It's easy to get discouraged by this and so many other things in politics. But when I read about the Scouting program, and see how these boys are being shaped into leaders, I breathe a (small) sigh of relief. The ship will be righted. And I've seen who's going to do it!
Wednesday, June 04, 2008
When the cops came after Tyrone Spiller, he was pushing his 1-year-old son in a stroller.
The kid proved to be an obstacle to his escape.Police say Spiller, 39, ditched the stroller on the street and ran last month, leaving his baby in the path of oncoming traffic.
The rest of the article can be found HERE, but this pretty well sums it up. This guy takes abandoning fatherly duties to a new low. Just disgusting...
Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Friday, April 18, 2008
Thursday, April 17, 2008
My kids were told he was coming, but that was about it. Oh, and that he would have a birthday over here! Just curious what other schools were doing (or not).
Thursday, April 10, 2008
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
Since this was the topic with the most votes on the "What would you like to learn about" poll, let's take a closer look at it. We'll try to keep it family friendly.
Despite what secular stereotypes may lead you to believe, the Catholic Church teaches that the "marital act", as revealed by God, has only two conditions placed upon it:
1) that it take place in the bonds of matrimony - that the two be married and,
2) that it be open to life - not that pregnancy necessarily be achieved or even attempted each time, but that the end result could possibly end in conception. That's it. Two things.
First is the marriage part. You have to be married. That's the only place where sexual relations properly belong. The Catechism of the Catholic Church tells us: "It (sexual relations) demands a total and definitive gift of persons to one another."(CCC, paragraph 2391) It is a total gift of the self, and therefore is only appropriate between a man and a woman who have publicly and faithfully committed their love to one another in Marriage. Anything less is a shadow of this. So when people start talking about handing out contraceptives to kids to promote "safe-sex", they've missed the boat entirely.
Now, open to life. That's a simple rule to guide us. A moment of reflection will reveal that certain "perversions" are considered illicit because they have no chance of resulting in the creation of a new life. Again, not that it must, but that it be open to it. This very simple guide will explain for us why homosexuality is wrong, why sterilization is wrong, and why contraceptive use is wrong. In all three instances, the procreative nature of the sexual act is thwarted. We've taken the power - God's power - into our own hands. In a sense, it's a re-enactment of the Original Sin. WE know better than God what's good for us. WE will decide how this ends up.
This is simply an introduction to the topic, and the Church certainly has much more to say about the issue. If you'd like to learn more, a good place to start might be this article on Catholic.com.
Feel free to use the Comments box for questions or comments.
Thursday, January 24, 2008
“I will want to take some time, though, to fast and pray and spend time by myself a lot and try to figure out where God is leading me,” he said. “If it closes one chapter, it opens another.”
And it's not even Lent! We rarely hear of people incorporating fasting into their prayer life these days (at least publicly), but I think he's setting a great example. Who would have thought - act like a Bengal to draw closer to God? (Just kidding!)
Paragraph 1434 of the Catechism tells us that
"The interior penance of the Christian can be expressed in many and various ways. Scripture and the Fathers insist above all on three forms, fasting, prayer, and almsgiving, which express conversion in relation to oneself, to God, and to others.
Most of us pray and give some amount to charity, but do we fast? There's something about a physical hunger to make us more deeply understand our need for God. Maybe a good place to start would be to abstain from meat on Fridays. While this is required of us during Lent, it is actually encouraged by the Church year-round.
Paragraph 1438 of the Catechism says:
The seasons and days of penance in the course of the liturgical year (Lent, and each Friday in memory of the death of the Lord) are intense moments of the Church's penitential practice. These times are particularly appropriate for spiritual exercises, penitential liturgies, pilgrimages as signs of penance, voluntary self-denial such as fasting and almsgiving, and fraternal sharing (charitable and missionary works). [Emphasis added]
Abstinence is not expressly required on Fridays, but only because the Church has left it to our discretion how we will make that penance. If we are not fasting or abstaining, we should be doing some other form of penance in remembrance of our Lord's suffering. Start today?