Right Wing Nation

Looking at the “Catholic vote.”

Maybe the one must see of the entire election season. One of the most powerful ads I’ve ever seen, from Catholic Vote. Beautifully done, moving, and very powerful.

Just not in the way they think:

Everybody had heard the rumors, spread on The Atlantic and DailyKos websites, that Palin’s fifth child, Trig, born last April, was not really hers — that Trig was really Palin’s 17 year-old daughter’s child, and Palin faked pregnancy to cover up her daughter’s condition. None of that was true, they all knew. But the top McCain staffers revealed that a story would be breaking on the wires in a few hours reporting that Palin’s daughter, Bristol, is, in fact, pregnant now. The father is Bristol’s boyfriend, the staffers were told, and she intends to marry him.

The McCain aides’ assignment was to call a list of about 40 top evangelical and other cultural conservative leaders. Each one would get a personal explanation of the story, and each was asked for his or her reaction. The McCain people reached nearly everyone before the story broke, and the verdict was unanimous — all the leaders supported Palin and her place on the McCain ticket.

[ . . . ]

When the day’s business was over, I drifted around the Colorado and Ohio delegations — two critical swing states — to get a feel for the delegates’ reaction. In the Colorado section, I ran into Sue Sharkey, from Windsor. When I asked what she thought, her reaction was not about Palin but herself.

“For me personally, it hit my heart this morning,” Sharkey told me, “because I was a 17 year-old girl, just like Sarah Palin’s daughter, and I had — I was in those shoes. And my son is with me, who will be 35 years old next week, and so I know what a difficult road there is for her.”

“I chose to have my son, and from that point I realized that I was a very strong right-to-life advocate,” Sharkey continued, her voice wavering ever so slightly. Roe v. Wade had been passed just the year before, and I already knew girls who were going through abortions. It wasn’t a choice for me; it wasn’t in my heart to do that. So when I heard the news this morning, it struck close to home for me.”

[ . . . ]

I asked Popma what she thought the larger reaction among evangelicals will be. “Their reaction is going to be exactly as mine,” she told me. “There hasn’t been one evangelical family that hasn’t gone through some sort of situation. Many of us are in this movement because of something that has happened in our lives.”

As for now, at least, evangelicals seem to be completely on Palin’s side. And McCain’s. This is a group that has been skeptical of McCain in the past. Now, it’s probably fair to say that he has never been more popular among evangelicals than he is at this moment. Whether that will last, or whether Palin will cost McCain support among other voters, is not yet clear. But within the confines of the Republican Convention, McCain’s surprising choice of Palin — and the equally surprising news about her family — is paying off.

There is a negative side, but again, it’s not what they think it is.

If these idiots had any clue about conservatives, they’d realize that every smear they spread about Palin or her family is driving voters to McCain.

Tennessee Guerilla Woman, who is no moderate (boy, is that the understatement of the decade) is really pissed off:

The ‘progressive’ men are actually counting the months of the woman’s pregnancies! That’s right folks. The formerly progressive netroots is trying to bring Sarah Palin down by proving that she is a slut! The menz over at Americablog (and followers) fervently hope to prove that one of Sarah Palin’s children was conceived “out of wedlock!”

This story is not to be confused with the ongoing netroots effort to shame the Palin family by proving that Sarah Palin’s teenage daughter is a slut.

A woman enters the presidential race and suddenly the progressive mission is to shame and mortify Sarah Palin, her children, her husband, and every woman who has ever found herself in a similar situation. And then no one will ever vote for Sarah Palin again because she’s a slut!?!?

John Aravosis imagines that we are still living in the Victorian Era when women were so devastated by public shaming that they committed suicide. Way to go John Aravosis! And we thought you already held the record for alienating women voters with your vile misogynistic posts about Hillary Rodham Clinton. There’s just something about ambitious women that brings out the inner misogynistic creep.

And note John Aravosis’ sick and puritanically deranged premise that an “out of wedlock” conception equates to an ‘illegitimate’ child! Many of us thought we had finally retired that sick and child-abusive term back in the 1960s!

And she’s just getting started.

Althouse isn’t happy, although she’s a moderate. But one of her commenters hit the bull’s eye:

When the tallying is completed of the landslide of states that voted for Sarah Palin … the Democrats need to take a good look at the bloggers who blew the election for them.

I guess these idiots just aren’t paying attention. Here’s Dobson’s statement from yesterday:

“In the 32-year history of Focus on the Family, we have offered prayer, counseling and resource assistance to tens of thousands of parents and children in the same situation the Palins are now facing. We have always encouraged the parents to love and support their children and always advised the girls to see their pregnancies through, even though there will of course be challenges along the way. That is what the Palins are doing, and they should be commended once again for not just talking about their pro-life and pro-family values, but living them out even in the midst of trying circumstances.

“Being a Christian does not mean you’re perfect. Nor does it mean your children are perfect. But it does mean there is forgiveness and restoration when we confess our imperfections to the Lord. I’ve been the beneficiary of that forgiveness and restoration in my own life countless times, as I’m sure the Palins have.

“The media are already trying to spin this as evidence Gov. Palin is a ‘hypocrite,’ but all it really means is that she and her family are human. They are in my prayers and those of millions of Americans.”

Keep it up, nutjobs. You’re giving us votes on a silver platter.

American Power has more — a lot more.

continues, now that I know that yes, people do make and eat sorghum in Pennsylvania. Since I have to go across town to Mass fairly soon (it’s the Feast of the Assumption), I can hunt on the way back.

There seems to be a lack of small groceries here. But there’s that place down by Mt. Tussey. They sell lots of local food items. I may try there, if Weis and Giant prove fruitless. Or sorghumless.

We’ll see.

Must work a trip to Wegman’s in soon. My McCain shirt came today. I figure I can dawdle in the organic, free range section, where the highest concentration of limousine liberals are.

There are some interesting results in the Pew Religion report. Hey, let’s play Jeopardy.

Ready? Here we go.

Of this group, 21% believed in God (6% believed in a personal God, 12% in God as an impersonal force, and 3% don’t know).

What are Presbyterians?

What are atheists. Atheists.

I don’t think that word means what these 21% of atheists think it means. Or something. Anyway, thought I’d share.

I really have to start reading about pages on blogs. I just discovered Brutally Honest, and Rick says this in his about page:

My current confused spiritual state was probably affected (if not birthed) in some way by my stint as a potential ordinand of the Episcopal Church in 1998. During that two year Ordination Exploration Program, I learned quite a bit about myself, but even more about organized religion. Needless to say, I was, to my chagrin at the time, found not worthy to continue toward ordination in the Episcopal Church. Seems I was a bit ” too rigid theologically” as some were quick to point out.

As I’ve said, I realized back in the 80s that with very few exceptions, Episcopalians range somewhere on the “theologically squishy” to “newage-y bozo-the-clown-liturgy nuts” spectrum. Theology is something most would just rather not contemplate — well, Christian theology, anyway. But this did surprise me:

I think however that my downfall began when I inadequately expressed how I felt about my penis. Yes, my penis. It seemed that the ECUSA was very concerned as to whether I could talk freely about my member during the psyschological phase of the program. I was literally speechless about it at the time, given that I had never really considered giving much thought to the notion before.

And, well, what can be said about that? I can honestly say, however, that the idea of a priest discussing his naughty bits — and the idea has never occurred to me until now, thank God — makes me squirm in my chair.

Back in the early 80s, I lived in Louisville (that’s pronounced lou-a-vull, for those who don’t know, not lou-is-ville or lou-ee-ville; that’s why those bumperstickers say “I heart lou-a-vull”), where I was a chef. While there, I was, for some reason, surrounded by Episcopalians of the nutty variety. Also, since Lousiville has to have more Catholic churches per capita than anywhere else on the planet (Louisville is so densely populated with Catholics that it is its own archdiocese), I attended a number of parishes.

Reagan was in the White House, and moonbats were howling and shrieking 24/7. And that conservative/liberal parish thing I referred to some time ago was more than obvious in Louisville.

On Bardstown Road, the bohemian section of Louisville, there is a Byzantine architecture church, St. James. It’s a lovely church from the outside — but then, you go inside and if you look up, you see the lidless eye of Sauron glaring down at you from the center of the dome.

Sister Mary Trotsky led the Intercessions. We prayed that we would all give up our earthly belongings, we prayed for the continued victory of the Sandanistas, you get the general drift.

This was, for the young’uns, a period of time when churches all over the United States were illegally sheltering refugees from Latin America (El Salvador and Honduras, mostly, but never Nicaragua).

The Homily (sermon) was twenty minutes of yowling and yammering about the evils of US foreign policy, and of course, our President. Sound familiar?

Aslan gives himself as a sacrifice

Aslan is resurrected

I’m afraid I got a late start cooking. I slept until 4:30 — unheard of for me (I have an internal clock that wakes me at 3:30 every morning. I haven’t slept as late as 4:30 in months.) I started the stock yesterday and simmered it for about eight hours, then put it in the refrigerator, turkey wings, veggies and all. I pulled it out and it’s on the simmer burner now. I’m waiting for the oven to get to 425 so I can start the pumpkin pie. So while I’m waiting …

We watched The Lion, The Witch, and The Wardrobe again yesterday evening (I blogged about it last year right after we got home from seeing it), and while watching it, I perused the comments at IMDB, as well as various other posted comments. And there are a couple of recurring themes that, well, mystify me.

First, I’m puzzled by the frequent comparisons to Tolkien’s Lord of the Rings. Although they fall into the same basic genre of fantasy, and although Tolkien and Lewis were friends and contemporaries, Lord of the Rings and Chronicles of Narnia are two very different works. If one must compare Chronicles of Narnia to Tolkien, then one should compare it to The Hobbit, and not Lord of the Rings. The Hobbit, like Chronicles of Narnia, is a children’s book.

Lord of the Rings is emphatically not. The one similarity between the two that is relevant to any filming of either is that both have huge numbers of fans with very precise visual images of both Middle Earth and Narnia. Both films did an equally excellent job of satisfying most fans in this regard. But there, the similarity ends.

Tolkien was a historical linguist and scholar in Old English and Old Norse. Tolkien wanted to write an epic in the tradition of the great Germanic epics, such as Beowulf and the Norse Eddas. The result was Lord of the Rings, an epic that fantasy writers have been trying to emulate since (and miserably so, for the most part). The evil characters — nazgûl, orcs, uruk-hai, Sauron — are meant to be truly evil, and horrify adults. Although I was immensely pleased with Peter Jackson’s filming of Lord of the Rings, I would not take small children to see it. Children can certainly read the books, but text and film are very different.

The Hobbit is the prequel, and creates the world in which Lord of the Rings takes place. But The Hobbit stands in stark contrast to the Lord of the Rings. The Hobbit is no epic, but a fairytale. Instead of the gravitas of Lord of the Rings, The Hobbit is light hearted.

Like The Hobbit, the Chronicles of Narnia is a fairytale, or cycle of seven fairytales, of which The Lion, The Witch, and The Wardrobe is one (they are filming another, Prince Caspian). Comparing LWW to LoTR makes little sense, because the two are very different works, with different audiences, different tones, and different themes. But as far as special effects is concerned, I was more impressed with LWW, only because creating talking animals that one can take seriously as characters is extremely difficult.

LWW revolves around Aslan, the lion, and Christ figure. One must be able to take Aslan seriously as a character, or the story will fail. This is what I feared most before we saw it last year, that Aslan would not be believable. But my fears were unfounded. Aslan is perhaps the best CGI I have seen filmed, and the choice of Liam Neeson as the voice was inspired. He gave Aslan the great dignity required for the film to work.

Second, I’m mystified by those who seem oblivious to the Christian allegory. Understand, I’m not at all surprised by all the reviewers who feel it necessary for politically correct, multiculturalist reasons to say that you can enjoy the film without focusing on the Christianity — what would you expect from liberals? And it’s true that you can choose to ignore the moral focus of the film, though why you would want to, I’m not sure.

Understand that I don’t expect anyone from a non-Christian culture to necessarily pick up on the allegory. When I was a grad student teaching ESL, one of the classes I taught was advanced reading. Japanese students always picked The Old Man and The Sea from the reading list — it turned out because they had all read it in Japanese — but they completely missed the Christian allegory that is the point of the story. That doesn’t mean they didn’t enjoy the story for its own sake.

But I do not see how anyone raised in a Christian culture could possibly miss the allegory in LWW. It’s not, as some reviewers tried to suggest, that there are “some Christian references” in the story; it revolves around Christianity. In fact, the point of the story is found in St. John, 3:16: “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.”

The Deep Magic — God’s Law — rules Narnia. Aslan is not a Christlike prophet figure, but the Trinitarian Godhead present from the Beginning, as we see when he says, “Do not cite the Deep Magic to me, Witch. I was there when it was written!” Aslan gives himself to Jadis as a sacrifice. It is no accident that it is Lucy and Susan — the two daughters of Eve — and not Peter and Edmund who spend the night mourning Aslan dead on the stone table, and are there to greet him when the stone table cracks and he is resurrected.

Some have said that the film failed to emphasize Edmund’s fallen nature, and that obscured the Christian message. Lewis used interior dialogue to show Edmund’s greed and fallen nature and the film could not have done that without using voiceovers (and thank God they didn’t do that), but Aslan did not sacrifice himself to save only Edmund. Aslan allowed Jadis to kill him and then resurrected to save all of Narnia. Those who feel that the Christian message would have been clearer had Edmund’s fallen nature been more explicit miss the Christian message itself.

Aslan — not the Pevensie children — is the central character. It is Aslan, the resurrected sacrificial victim, who saves Narnia. The Pevensie children are his witnesses. Even in the film, no ambiguity exists about the role of Aslan and the Pevensies.

The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe may be a children’s story, a fairytale, but it is a Christian allegory. It is an inspiring movie, and I highly recommend it. Yes, you can watch it and ignore the Christianity, but why bother to watch a movie and ignore the point?

I eagerly await the release of Prince Caspian.

Okay, back to the kitchen.

This week we have to issue joint awards, both to World Net Daily for putting a mouthbreather spin on the story, and to the parents named in the story. Pagan Christmas ritual pressed on young kids:

A public-school handout urging young children in Virginia to attend a “Pagan ritual” tomorrow to “celebrate Yule” is sparking objections from concerned parents.

[ . . . ]

“Amazing – government schools ban orthodox Christianity, but allow an openly pagan organization to proselytize six-year-olds!” one observer who asked for anonymity told WND.

No doubt the “observer” asked for anonymity because he knows what a drooling idiot he is — but I’m getting ahead of myself. So to condense, some pagan group affiliated with the Unitarians is handing out pagan Yule flyers at school and parents are bent out of shape about it. So what, you wonder, makes them morons? The reason the school is allowing the flyers to be passed out:

School Board chairwoman Sue Friedman told WND the flyer was distributed because the school was forced to do so, following a decision by the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Maryland.

The ruling concluded if one community group were allowed to use a flyer-distribution program at a school, then all groups must be given the same access. The group initiating that case objected to a policy that allowed school officials to arbitrarily discriminate against groups they did not like – in that instance, a Christian organization.

So the school had tried to discriminate against Christians and the court correctly smacked them down for it. But these idiots are trying to turn around and do the same thing. Clearly, World Net Daily and these morons need a refresher course in the Constitution, specifically the First Amendment:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Okay, look, idiots. You can have it one of two — and only two — ways. Either there will be no religious material of any kind, reflecting any religious group, including yours at the school, or there will be any religious materal of any kind, reflecting any religious group, including yours at the school. Make up your minds. Which way do you want it?

In other words, morons, if the school allows Christian materials, it must also allow pagan materials. And please note the absence of any clause in the Constitution that pertains to what you approve of. What you approve of isn’t relevant in this case. If you want your kids subject only to Christian materials, then take them out of public school and put them in a parochial school.

Otherwise, shut up. Idiots.

And World Net Daily gets the idiot award because the author, Bob Unruh, deliberately put this hypocritical, idiotic spin on the story. Hat tip to Education Wonks, by the way.

In the spirit of that earlier post, I’d like to respond to this, from the Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler:

Muslim leaders condemn Pope’s speech, want apology

Uhm, “Who could possibly care?” Alex?

One thing that bothers me is that it certainly seems that every time I read a Christian blog, the author drinks the “Socialism is Christian” kool-aid. Given that most churches also partake of the Stalinist beverage to some extent (that includes Rome and to a lesser extent, the Orthodox), I suppose this shouldn’t be surprising. But let’s look at this for a moment from a Christian point of view.

Remember the Ten Commandments? Two are relevant here:

Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour’s.

and

Thou shalt not steal.

How, exactly, does one reconcile the redistribution of wealth with these commandments? Deciding to steal someone’s property “democratically” is still stealing. Theft is theft. John’s property is John’s property, and voting to steal it is voting to steal it, and nothing more. And yes, it’s that black and white.

Socialist governmental policies (entitlement programs, food stamps, welfare, “progressive” taxation) are not only not Christian; they violate the Ten Commandments, and no matter what the official policy of any church may be, they are therefore anti-Christian. Yes, the poor should be helped — willingly, and not by stealing from others.

Yes, the welfare of society is the business of the church — and this is why churches sponsor charities. But churches should condemn welfare programs as the anti-Christian, immoral policies they are.

And that’s my two cents.

We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible;

And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the Only-begotten, Begotten of the Father before all worlds, Light of Light, Very God of Very God, Begotten, not made; of one essence with the Father, by whom all things were made:

Who for us men and for our salvation came down from heaven, and was incarnate of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary, and was made man;

And was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate, and suffered and was buried;

And the third day He rose again, according to the Scriptures;

And ascended into heaven, and sitteth at the right hand of the Father;

And He shall come again with glory to judge the quick and the dead, Whose kingdom shall have no end.

And we believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, and Giver of Life, Who proceedeth from the Father, Who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified, Who spake by the Prophets;

And we believe in one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church.

We acknowledge one Baptism for the remission of sins.

We look for the Resurrection of the dead,

And the Life of the world to come. Amen.

+Glory to Thee, our God, Glory to Thee.

O Heavenly King, Comforter, the Spirit of Truth, Who art everywhere present and fillest all things, the Treasury of good things and Giver of life: Come, and abide in us, and cleanse us from every stain, and save our souls, O Good One.

+Holy God, Holy Mighty, Holy Immortal: have mercy on us.
+Holy God, Holy Mighty, Holy Immortal: have mercy on us.
+Holy God, Holy Mighty, Holy Immortal: have mercy on us.

+Glory to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit, both now and ever, and unto the ages of ages. Amen.

All-Holy Trinity, have mercy on us. Lord, cleanse us from our sins. Master, pardon our iniquities. Holy God, visit and heal our infirmities for Thy name’s sake.

Lord, have mercy.
Lord, have mercy.
Lord, have mercy.

+Glory to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit, both now and ever, and unto the ages of ages.

Our Father, who art in Heaven, hallowed be Thy name. Thy Kingdom come, Thy will be done, on earth as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread, and forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us; and lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one.

For Thine is the Kingdom, and the power, and the glory, of the +Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, now and ever and unto ages of ages. Amen.

I don’t blog much about religion, because it’s something that to me is deeply personal, and out of respect for readers of different faiths. But I’m going to make an exception today to that policy.

God or the Girl is on right now (TiVO) — and believe it or not, it is actually pretty good (and the title really doesn’t describe the show). It’s a very respectful glimpse of three young men who are all struggling with whether they should become priests.

The contrast between this respectful treatment and these “we don’t discriminate, we don’t care what you believe, come to our church” commercials is striking — and led me to this blog entry.

It seems the Christendom has divided into two halves: The churches that hold to their convictions, and the churches that seem to see themselves as large group therapy sessions.

In the first group, we have Roman Catholicism, Eastern (and Oriental) Orthodoxy, the LDS, and the conservative Protestant churches. In the second, we have the so-called “mainstream” Protestant denominations.

Even though all of the churches in the former group don’t necessarily share the same theology, they are all similar in one important way: They see themselves as communities of faith, while the second group see themselves as communities of … well, what?

When we gather for the Mass or Divine Liturgy, we do so as a community of believers. We recite the Nicene Creed to confirm our belief. We pray the same prayers together, because we are a community of believers. The Eucharist is the celebration of our community, where all who profess the faith partake of the Body and Blood of our Lord. We gather to worship as members of a community that goes back to the beginning of Christianity — this is why we have an order for the Mass or the Divine Liturgy, one that changes very little over time. On any given day, the Mass or the Divine Liturgy is the same all over the world; we are not just a community in our own parish, but worldwide.

Yes, the Roman Catholics have moonbat clergy and members who want to change the church into a Unitarian Universalist clone (note that the Orthodox do not), but the church is not a democracy, and the Benedict XVI is starting to stand firmly against it. The Anglican Communion is being torn apart by the same factions, though without a rigid hierarchy, the Anglicans may very well split, especially since the Anglicans long ago dropped doctrinal allegiance from their priority list. And I’m not trashing the Anglicans; I feel a great deal of sympathy for Anglican believers and the situation in which they find themselves. Nor is the problem one of a single issue, such as the ordination of women; these “issues” come in constellations, and always with a watered down, feel good, build your self-esteem and be included theology.

This is why ecumenism is such a thorny issue for the former group, yet comes so easily to “mainstream” Protestants. It’s a matter of belief. Doctrine. Theology.

From the former perspective, ecumenism is difficult enough with churches in which you are in near total theological unity: Rome and Orthodoxy, for example. It is difficult because there are no “picky” points when it comes to doctrine. One phrase added to the Nicene Creed (the filioque) can block unity until one side moves.

But how do you unify with a church that requires very little in the way of belief from its members? Community cantatas and prayer services are all very well, but the ultimate goal of ecumenism is full communion, and if you commune because you are part of a community of believers, how then do you allow non-believers to commune?

All of the former churches know exactly who they are, and exactly what they believe. The latter churces not only do not know, but do not care, or see why it should be an issue. And indeed, if you have redefined yourself to be some kind of social club, where faith and doctrine have taken a back seat to inclusivity and political correctness even to the point that you no longer care if your clergy believe in the Divine nature of Jesus Christ, why would you care about faith?

I’m not a big fan of Protestantism when it comes to faith and theology. However, I have the utmost respect for the Protestant churches who have refused to water down faith in favor of “inclusion,” and like Catholicism and Orthodoxy, have drawn a line in the sand and state, “This is who we are and what we believe, and we don’t care whether you approve or not.” However much we may differ on matters of faith, we both belong to communities of believers.

It is not the purpose of the Church to make you feel good about yourself, improve your self-esteem, give you warm fuzzies, make you feel included no matter what, or validate you. The “mainstream” Protestants have lost sight of why the Church exists, and have nothing to offer congregants they can’t get watching Oprah on TV.

When I was younger, I came very close to going to seminary and taking vows. I grew up not far from a Benedictine Archabbey, where I spent a significant amount of time. Even later in life, I spent two weeks at an Orthodox monastery (and let me tell you, that’s hard on your feet — they pray for hours, and if you didn’t know, the Orthodox never sit or kneel, but stand throughout). Church history and theology both fascinate me. End the preface.

Ecumenism was at its most trendy in the 80s, when we lived in Louisville (see here). I can’t say I was impressed then, and am even less so now.

I needed new glasses anyway, and then, my last pair broke. So for a while I was wearing the pair I got before them, my very first pair of glasses, that no longer work very well. I couldn’t read much, unless it was big print.

So I got new glasses — and I can read!

At Barnes and Noble, I picked up this book:

Great book — and if you buy it from Amazon by clicking on the image above, I get a little money. Every bit helps, you know.

The dependably conservative Pittsburgh Tribune-Review does not shy away from smacking conservatives when they go off the deep end — it’s one of the reasons I love this newspaper and read it every day:

For an insight into how brilliant was the Framers’ decision to write into the Bill of Rights the freedoms of speech and religion, look no further than the furor over “The Da Vinci Code,” which opens today at theaters nationwide.

Get a grip, folks. The best-selling, badly written Dan Brown novel turned into a dullish film by director Ron Howard is fiction.

 [ . . . ]

Can the church not say as does the soon-to-be archbishop of Washington, D.C., “This is a teachable moment”?

Do not rail, do not boycott, do not suppress.

Teach.

Indeed. And please, spare me the “buts.” The book is fiction. Sure, there are people who are too stupid to realize it, but that’s hardly Brown’s responsibility. And once again, social conservatives are addressing a symptom instead of the disease; the problem is a gullible popular culture that will swallow any nonsense, provided that it’s not Christiantity, and that it’s presented as “alternative spirituality.”

Like the Trib-Review said. Don’t whine. Teach.

It’s fairly obvious I’m not going to get to Mass today — it’s Thursday, I always go to Mass on Thursdays here, for the Eucharistic Adoration. A. I do not feel well at all. B. I was going anyway, but one of our canine friends here decided to upchuck right on my feet and now I have to clean that up — and take a second shower. C. I do not feel well.

Generally, I believe people should choose their own battles, and realize that priorities differ from person to person. However, sometimes people rail about such silly things that they badly need to be slapped back into reality. I’m not picking on Cafeteria, mind; you can find this all over the blogosphere.

I’m a practicing Catholic, and a conservative one. I go to Mass an average of four times a week, not just on Sundays, and always on Thursdays for the Adoration of the Eucharist. But really, all this howling about The DaVinci Code is just, well, it’s stupid.

Repeat after me:

Fic-tion

Again:

Fic-tion

And a third time:

Fic-tion

Come on, now. The world is full of nutjobs. This is nothing more than more nuttiness. Most feel the novel was a good read (I tried, but just could not get into it), and most don’t believe it. One more time:

Fic-tion

If you’re offended by a novel (say it again: Fic-tion) then I really don’t see how you’re any less bad than the spoiled brats on the left who are always howling about how offended they are.

One more time:

Fic-tion

And for good measure, three last words:

Get. A. Life

Here we have within the Church the antithesis of the “let’s just all love each other and sing kumbayah while we do liturgical dance and beat on Great Spirit drums” Mahoney crew:

But in a speech to US Catholic business leaders, Dr Pell said Western democracy was also suffering a crisis of confidence as evidenced by the decline in fertility rates. “Pagan emptiness” and Western fears of the uncontrollable forces of nature had contributed to “hysteric and extreme claims” about global warming.

“In the past, pagans sacrificed animals and even humans in vain attempts to placate capricious and cruel gods. Today they demand a reduction in carbon dioxide emissions.”

Hear, hear, hear!

Hat tip: Misha

As a Catholic, I am offended by William Donohue’s idiocy, and by extension, the mis-named Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights, which isn’t interested in rights, but special rights not to be offended.

When South Park was prevented from showing Mohammed by Comedy Central, Donohue demonstrated what an utter jackass he was. He may be a good Catholic, but he’s a lousy American.

However, he wasn’t content with that show of idiocy. When that Oregon student paper published the Jesus cartoons, again, he demonstrated that he has no grasp of what this nation is about, and has never read the Constitution of the United States. What’s next, rioting in the streets? Calls for beheadings?

This man and organization truly disgust me — even more than the leftist protesters disgust me.

Mr. Donohue and the Catholic League, please read your Constitution and realize that we have no right not to be offended. Then see here and here for truly Christian responses to these offensive cartoons.

“Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s; and to God, the things that are God’s.”
The Gospel According to St. Matthew, 22:21

This was spawned in part by an article on The Cafeteria is Closed, supporting the ecclesiastical discipline of Catholic legislators who support abortion, and an article on Gay Patriot, about the University of the Cumberlands receiving tax monies from the Commonwealth of Kentucky.

No matter whether I support the stance or not, I strongly disagree with the ecclesiastical discipline of politicians for their voting patterns on issues — and I question whether the Church even has the authority to do so. After all, one who votes for a pro-abortion bill has not, technically, violated any precept over which the Church has authority; were a politician to have an abortion, that would be an entirely different situation, and the Church would have the authority to discipline her.

I question whether one can be a good, practicing Catholic and support abortion, but that is a matter of conscience (and one of ecclesiastical function). That does not mean, however, that I think Kerry or Kennedy, or whoever should be excommunicated because of his stance on abortion law in the United States.

The problem I have with this is that anti-Catholicism is alive and well, and for two hundred years here in the United States it was fueled by the belief that Roman Catholics would put their allegiance to Rome before their allegiance to the United States. This, after all, was the primary reason the Knights of Columbus campaigned for “one nation under God” to be included in the Pledge of Allegiance, and this belief was alive and well as recently as the campaign of John F. Kennedy (this is also why I sympathize with Mitt Romney, who is being put through the same questions Kennedy was).

If the Church starts excommunicating politicians who support abortion, then that belief will again rear its ugly head. And if politicians vote against abortion solely because they fear the discipline of the Church, then that belief is justified, and those politicians should be kicked out of office.

I use abortion here only because it is the key Catholic political hot button, but immigration or gay marriage would be equally applicable.

I am a practicing Catholic, and not a liberal kumbayah Catholic. But I would vote for no politician who would put his allegiance to the Vatican over his allegiance to the United States. And I would encourage other conservative Catholics to ponder this issue deeply before giving it their support. Such things have a way of biting back.

We see this in an incidental point Gay Patriot makes when he discusses the University of the Cumberlands, and whether the university should receive taxpayer funds. He says:

How ironic though that the Blaine Amendment adopted to the Kentucky Constitution, and indeed most state constitutions, during the height of anti-Catholic hysteria in the late 19th-century could now come back to bite them in the ass.

Indeed. The Blaine Amendment, more appropriately termed Blaine Amendments, since the Amendment was never ratified by the Senate but was adopted by all but eleven of the states, was fueled by anti-Catholic hysteria in the 19th century, in response to the large number of Catholic schools that had been established in the United States. Because there were quite a few individual state amendments, I cannot cite the text, but Blaine Amendments denied funding to Catholic students or schools (depending on which one of the various amendments passed).

The Blaine Amendments were pushed by Protestants and Protestant churches and organizations. They were, in fact, the beginning of the “wall of separation between Church and state,” at least in the realm of education.

Here we have an example of how legislation can bite back. The Blaine Amendments, or the “wall of separation” that descended from those amendments, are now being used against Protestants, and they don’t like it. Now, we see Protestants — some of whom feel the same way about Catholics as did their forbears who passed the Blaine Amendments — doing everything they can to undo the damage they created. And though I sympathize, part of me cannot help but feel that they brought it on themselves.

Be careful what you legislate — in Church or state — lest you become a victim of your legislations. As they say, the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Actually, it’s not. It’s one more example that the ACLU and its affiliates ironically do not understand the Constitution. This is what the establishment clause is supposed to protect — and not putting up Christmas trees.

Oh. You want to know what I’m talking about? Sure. It seems that a single teacher at a Catholic school in New York got pregnant, and told her administrators that she was going to have the baby, but had no intention of marrying the father — and they fired her:

Fired teacher, unwed and pregnant, sues Catholic school
NEW YORK (AP) — The New York Civil Liberties Union has filed a federal discrimination complaint against a Catholic school, charging that it unjustly fired an unmarried teacher for being pregnant.

“I don’t understand how a religion that prides itself on forgiving and on valuing life could terminate me because I’m pregnant and choosing to have this baby,” Michelle McCusker said Monday at a news conference to announce the suit.

The 26-year-old preschool teacher was fired last month from St. Rose of Lima in Queens, according to published reports. The Diocese of Brooklyn also was named in the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission complaint.

“This is a difficult situation for every person involved, but the school had no choice but to follow the principles contained in the teachers’ personnel handbook,” diocese spokesman Frank DeRosa said in a statement.

The handbook says that each teacher must “convey the teachings of the Catholic faith by his or her words and actions.”

What’s amazing is that the NYCLU don’t get it — and they put it on their website:

NEW YORK — The New York Civil Liberties Union today charged a private Catholic school with discriminating against an unmarried Catholic schoolteacher by firing her because she became pregnant.

What part of “private Catholic school” don’t these idiots understand?

“Michelle McCusker was fired because she chose to have a child,” said Donna Lieberman, Executive Director of the NYCLU.

No, moron, she was fired because she chose to have a child out of wedlock, at a private Catholic school. What is so difficult to understand about that?

John Leo identifies a broader problem:

There’s a broader problem: many institutions are now using anti-bias laws and regulations to trample the ministerial function.

No doubt, though that’s not the root problem here. The problem is that the government is not supposed to be able to intrude on non-governmental agencies — you know, as in, for example, private Catholic schools. This is the legacy of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the best legislative example of that chestnut, “The road to hell is paved with good intentions.”

Barry Goldwater wouldn’t vote for it for this very reason: The government can adopt all the non-discrimination policies it wants, for its own employees; the government has no business telling anyone else who they may or may not hire or fire, or dictate any “anti-discrimination” policies in the private sector.

It’s fortunate this woman was fired, since she’s too stupid to understand why she got fired — and therefore too stupid to ever be allowed anywhere near a classroom.

Homily by the Holy Father at the Easter Vigil

(Saint Peter’s Basilica, 15 April 2006)

“You seek Jesus of Nazareth, who was crucified. He has risen, he is not here” (Mk 16:6). With these words, God’s messenger, robed in light, spoke to the women who were looking for the body of Jesus in the tomb. But the Evangelist says the same thing to us on this holy night: Jesus is not a character from the past. He lives, and he walks before us as one who is alive, he calls us to follow him, the living one, and in this way to discover for ourselves too the path of life.

Urbi et Orbi Message of His Holiness Benedict XVI

(Easter Sunday, 16 April 2006)

Dear Brothers and Sisters!

Christus resurrexit! - Christ is risen!

During last night’s great Vigil we relived the decisive and ever-present event of the Resurrection, the central mystery of the Christian faith. Innumerable Paschal candles were lit in churches, to symbolize the light of Christ which has enlightened and continues to enlighten humanity, conquering the darkness of sin and death for ever. And today there re-echo powerfully the words which dumbfounded the women on the morning of the first day after the Sabbath, when they came to the tomb where Christ’s body, taken down in haste from the Cross, had been laid. Sad and disconsolate over the loss of their Master, they found the great stone rolled away, and when they entered they saw that his body was no longer there. As they stood there, uncertain and bewildered, two men in dazzling apparel surprised them, saying: “Why do you seek the living among the dead? He is not here, he is risen” (Lk 24:5-6). “Non est hic, sed resurrexit” (Lk 24:6). Ever since that morning, these words have not ceased to resound throughout the universe as a proclamation of joy which spans the centuries unchanged and, at the same time, charged with infinite and ever new resonances.

Christ is risen!

It began last night at 8:15 and was over at 10:45. The New Fire ceremony needs tweaking: There just isn’t enough room for hundreds of people to walk around the church, with or without candles. The Exultet was lovely. There was the Blessing of the Water, and there were 21 people accepted into the Church last night. The Monsignor welcomed each one individually, which was time-consuming, but the only appropriate way to welcome new members, and they were all confirmed, and all received First Communion last night.

And as soon as I’m fully awake, I’m going out to plant some more things.

Let us proclaim the mysery of faith!

Christ has died, Christ is risen, Christ will come again!

Exultet!
Gregorian chant mp3: Exultet!

I just got back a little while ago from Good Friday services at OLV. My first mistake was not leaving early enough; OLV is on the other side of town, and I have no choice but to drive through State College. The traffic was bumper to bumper all the way, and as I discovered, there were many others on their way to OLV.

It’s a medium size church, but a large congregation (there are four Masses on Sundays, plus the anticipatory Saturday night Mass). When I got there, the parking lot was full, and I ended up parking six blocks away. And the church was packed.

OLV is the conservative parish here. Gregorian chants and dignified liturgies (the “singing nun” liturgies are across the street from the house here, at St. Josef Stalin). It is ugly, though, what I call 70s grotto architecture. It’s larger than it looks, especially when compared to a traditional architecture church, because it’s very wide.

The choir is first rate (it’s a college town, after all) and the architects had music in mind when they designed the acoustics. You have to strain to understand the homily — too much echo.

Father Godspell officiated, with the customary three deacons. I call him Father Godspell because he’s the most liberal of the priests on staff, though the extent of his liberalism is his tendency to mention Godspell in every single homily he gives. He’s a very nice man, and I don’t mean it as a jibe.

Speaking of his homily, yes, he did mention Godspell, but if he’d had any temptation to turn Good Friday into a celebration of Marxism or a condemnation of the White House, he resisted it. He spoke of the mystery of Christ’s death — which, I would like to point out, is exactly what Good Friday is all about, and therefore, what he should have been speaking of.

According to ancient tradition, we venerated the cross (that took a good forty minutes) while the choir sang softly. It was quite a lovely service. On Good Friday we commune, but there is no Mass; all of the consecrated Hosts are from Holy Thursday, and the Tabernacle is cleared. The next Mass will be the Easter Vigil, tomorrow night.

Crucem tuam adoramus Domine; et sanctam resurrectionem tuam laudamus et glorificamus: ecce enim propter lignum venit gaudium in universo mundo.

The Gospel According to Saint John, 18:1-19:42

When Jesus had said these things, he went forth with his disciples over the brook Cedron, where there was a garden, into which he entered with his disciples. 2 And Judas also, who betrayed him, knew the place; because Jesus had often resorted thither together with his disciples. 3 Judas therefore having received a band of soldiers and servants from the chief priests and the Pharisees, cometh thither with lanterns and torches and weapons. 4 Jesus therefore, knowing all things that should come upon him, went forth, and said to them: Whom seek ye? 5 They answered him: Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus saith to them: I am he. And Judas also, who betrayed him, stood with them.

     6 As soon therefore as he had said to them: I am he; they went backward, and fell to the ground. 7 Again therefore he asked them: Whom seek ye? And they said, Jesus of Nazareth. 8 Jesus answered, I have told you that I am he. If therefore you seek me, let these go their way. 9 That the word might be fulfilled which he said: Of them whom thou hast given me, I have not lost any one. 10 Then Simon Peter, having a sword, drew it, and struck the servant of the high priest, and cut off his right ear. And the name of the servant was Malchus.

     11 Jesus therefore said to Peter: Put up thy sword into the scabbard. The chalice which my Father hath given me, shall I not drink it? 12 Then the band and the tribune, and the servants of the Jews, took Jesus, and bound him: 13 And they led him aw