Nothing Special

Everything I’ve ever thought was, long before me, thought already.

Everything I’ve ever said, said years before my thought was ready.

Everything I’ve ever done, done prior to me and done by many.

I have of yet paved no new ground. My life is just stale miscellany.

I’m made of commonplace experience

Of the unromantic I am rife.

I lack any sort of new adventure.

I've mastered not fiddle or fife.

Oh, give me reason now to try and do my best for all my life.

For what‘s the worth of bland achievement when it costs me so much strife.

I am given maps written for me by those who do what I cannot;

By those who preach of this and that, how to live life and how to not.

I know this map is incorrect but it’s the constant lesson that I’m taught.

But then again what else is there?

For no thing have I ever fought.

Drop the map and change your course for freedom remains the better choice.

Let Life’s eternal melody ring, in harmony with your unique voice.

Countless affairs have brought me sorrow; for each and every one I’ve cried,

But nothing draws my mourning more than self-loathing lives that never tried.

On Telling Our Friends We Hate Them

      I've been noticing (for quite some time now) a particular trend in certain friendships and I'm sure everyone has noticed and possibly even talked about the kind of relationships that I'm about to discuss. Before I get to deep into it I just want to show the little pic that I've seen 50 or so times that prompted me to write about it.

     I know this is just a fun little graphic, and I know this is going to hit home for a lot of us so trust me when I say it's not something I necessarily want to dissect myself. I don't really want to take a deeper look at this for two reasons: first, because this might be offensive to friends and I have an embarrassingly deep wanting to receive affirmation from people who like what I do and, second, because some of the best of friendships that I have had in my life are resembled by this graphic, at least to a certain degree.

     The first thing I want to question is why we're ok with forming relationships like this. I know that this is not the healthiest way to form relationships and I feel like it's not just me that feels this way. I suppose before we get any further I should clarify that I don't know to what extent these sarcastic and joking insults are ok. It's hard for me to take a position on tolerating them at all for myself, and yet it's had for me to say that there is never a place for it at all in personal relationships. I grew up not seeing it as harmful and I see how sarcasm can be used to make a point with emphasis but Jesus did say, "Let your yes be yes," didn't he? Is it really ok speak insincerely in any way, even when feigning annoyance or dislike? I'm not sure.

     I expect the first counterargument to all this ruckus I'm raising is that it depends on who you're talking to. If I know someone well enough to the point that they know when I'm joking, it's no big deal. Maybe, but what if the comments are negative even if the intention is positive? First off, I'd say that's a huge risk to take because we can't know for sure that we're not feeding insecurities of our loved ones making them more self-conscious. After all, those we love most can hurt us the most, right? So joking with those people closest to us about how stupid they are might have more of an effect that we can see when they pretend to laugh it off.

     The other day I was reminded about how what we do effects our own beliefs and outlooks. Pascal said:

"If we do not live the way we believe, then we will end up believing the way we live."

     So not only could we negatively affect our family and friends through sarcasm and insults, but we can even change the light in which we see them. Without even noticing, we can develop a lack of empathy and a subliminal annoyance in ourselves toward those we treat with "playful" disrespect. This inevitably results in all sorts of problems to popping up in our relationships. You don't think it's true? Just ask my little brothers about my "playful jokes". I went from joking around,  to picking on them to actually getting annoyed by more than half of the stuff they did. They didn't deserve it, but I had transformed myself into a highly efficient criticizing machine. Now I literally can't joke like that with them at all because it stirs years of built up anger. It's easy to assume somebody is going to just get over something  when you're the one throwing the punches.

     Now I realize that my situation is different since they are my brothers and I'm the older one, but a lot of times that's how friends are too. Some friends are able to dish it out but can't take it. Are you willing to risk ruining a relationship over not wanting to put the effort into being a positive and loving friend? That's the real point of this little piece. Of course, there are some people who can get along just fine with all this and I guess that's up to each of us. I just wanted to point out that I don't see this approach as a very loving way to go about making and maintaining friendships.

     This probably hits home for everybody. I know it does for me, but I say it because I think it's important that we NOT be ok with where we stand as a society. Just type in sarcasm to a google image search and look at the plethora of memes to choose from. We obviously hold sarcasm and this style of friendship in high regard, but why? I'm just writing to challenge that notion, get 20 or so people thinking about it. The facts are: we're gonna mess up and I'm still not completely sure whether or not I think a little bit of sarcasm is ok to mix in with the rest of the humor in our relationships, but here is the point:

I think we ought to build up loving friendships instead of tearing down bland ones. 

I think instead of being proud of ourselves, we should be ashamed that we treat family and friends the worst.

The Power of My Will

as far as I can see and feel the wind itself has stopped
inside this Space I safely pace and view my tended Gob
a Stuff of lot with Ends and Odds: all lesser goods transformed to Firsts
though bland the taste, I drink these Things, suppressing deathless thirsts

ages, it seems, collecting my Things and building My Walls around Them
protected and closed, divorced from storm; untouched My Space remains
thunder booms, flooding persists; my walls berated by breeze and flame
keep out of reach Luxurious Treats and Trophies and Comforts that I have attained.

I have beaten the storm, so I risk a look out beyond where my confidence ends
and though knowing no fear at first as I peer, surprised by the scene to which I descend
the Walls that I knew which stood fast and held true were unstable and barely erect
still the paramount storm though ferocious had worn from the unsteady Walls not a speck

what fantasy is this force untamed that yields to foe so feeble and frail
flames refuse to singe My Walls with wind conceding in gust after gale
My Walls are all delicate boundaries so weak; so what holds Them upright ever seemingly still
the cold surge of My pride lets any fear die; I know now the power of my will

any sureness just gained immediately wanes as i interpret the scene once over again.
what sort of rigged game is played by this rain? what devious rules, unfair and arcane?
i am sheltered by an unnatural abode; any power i hold, this storm has bestowed.
there is only one answer i cannot forebode; is this storm a dead end or a fork in the road?

though my structure stands all the more firmly upright, my confidence slumps; day turns into night
all the warmth leaves, i am left without light, and somehow it’s darkness that grants a small sight
i see myself quivering, fearful, forlorn, while feeling no comfort i act safe and warm,
without warning the onslaught takes a new form; a terrifyingly tangible silence is born

no water, no fire, no wind and no rain; no thunder, no lightning, no storm, only pain
silence uncovers aching i tried to contain, against limitless longing my will fights in vain
this chaotic silence uncovers inside the deepest desires my own will cast aside
fearful, unready, and stifling my pride, confused by my yearning, my will opens wide

The silence continues but as if on cue my walls fold and crumble so long overdue
Now into to wild and unknown I flew, away from the only things I ever knew
As I run fire rises surrounded by rain, my old foe lifts me up not to hurt but sustain
To protect my will and never restrain, to empower it toward a victorious campaign

But here in this current I am not alone. The clouds and the trees, the rivers that flow
The stars and the moons, and gravity’s pull have all understood what I finally know.
That thing that before I had tried to ignore, it's the silence without it I truly deplore.
To soar with this Storm is what I’m meant for. Now the power of my will is immeasurably more.

3 Ways to Be a Better Christian

     It gets me pretty upset that the word Christian pretty much means nothing anymore. Of course, you're probably thinking, "It's a follower of Christ, duh," but please, let's try to be realistic here. What does a follower of Christ do?

Go to church every Sunday. Check.
Youth Group at some point in life. Check.
Have a conversion story ready. Check
Date a Christian. Check.
Talk a big game with church friends then screw up in real life...unfortunately, usually check.

     Then you have your different kinds of Christians out there. Everybody has opinions but I can only speak for my experience:

     Us Catholics think we're the best and are sometimes prideful because of that. Evangelicals think we're the whore of Babylon headed for Hell (it's actually Jerusalem, read your Bible in context). Other Protestants think we're idolaters who think we can earn salvation and are only most likely going to Hell. Everybody else thinks we hate women, rape little boys and are stuck in the middle ages.

The over-generalized stereotypes I've noticed:

      Fundamentalist don't believe in metaphors except for John 6 ( and other Catholic leaning verses). Evangelicals are like the embarrassing little brother who talks too much and won't listen to logic or science. Baptists are either black or have a Southern accent, hate fun, and sing gospel music. Anglicans even confuse themselves on if they're Protestant, Catholic, both or neither. Methodists are halfway between Anglicans and Baptists. Episcopals have gay ministers. Non-denominatial Christians are just a denomination that doesn't think details matter but they have really fun names for their churches (ie: The Church Without Walls, The Refreshing Church or La Iglesia). Mormon's have lots of wives and get their own planets and even though they believe weird things and ride bikes they seem so normal and are REALLY nice.

     The problem is that being Christian doesn't have anything to do with any of this. Even being nice is only a minuscule element to the everyday life of a Christian. Now, we're almost to what you've been waiting for, or skipped to since it's bolded and you just wanted the list anyway. Christians, if we are truly followers of Christ must lay down our entire lives as witnesses of God. We will the good of all others no matter the cost (love/charity). People should be able to tell by the way we live that we are Christian. How? That's where the three things come in.

     I'm not going to explain them because I'm lazy. No, really it's because I want to encourage you to meditate on them in your prayer time today. These are three things that I think are relatively uncommon to be found consistently all in one person and I think I have none of them consistently.

1) Let everything you say be true.


2) Take responsibility for everything that you do, except the good things.


3) Do everything you do like it's a once in a lifetime experience.


Make the word Christian mean something. I'll be working on it too.

Peace.

P.S.   I  want to clarify that I am not a blogger. I'm a guy with a blog. Bloggers blog consistently and sometimes blog for the sake of blogging. I post a blog when I have something to say. Sorry to be lame.

Update!!!

Here are a few updates on the fight against the HHS Mandate, link style.

Franciscan University Drops Student Health Insurance Plan

Ohio university sues over birth control mandate

Ave Maria to follow FUS example

Notre Dame's federal-court lawsuit

Overview by Aggie Catholic

and just for good measure.


...so this is what it feels like to be Drudge or HuffPo.

Peace.

Christian Unity: "How Not To"

Most of what I am about to say has already been said by people far exceeding me in understanding, knowledge and (particularly) wisdom. The problem is that not many people hear what they have to say, so I am going to attempt to share some of the knowledge that I have retained from reading and listening to those who have given testimony on the possibility of Christian unity.

First let me give Peter Kreeft's simple list of nine false grounds for Christian unity that have been tried without any real success and WILL NEVER WORK (caps stuff is usually important). I'll complicate each one for you with an explanation.

1. Reasonable compromise 

- It is unacceptable that anyone of the Christian faith would attempt this because of the implications of compromising faith in Christ. To compromise of faith in Christ means to compromise Christ; to compromise Christ means compromise the Truth (since Christ is Truth); compromise the Truth is to compromise Love (for loving anything untrue is idolatry).

- Each of those direct and inevitabile effects is a tragedy in itself, which makes compromise wholly objectionable.

2. Education and Understanding

- The idea that we can study scripture and philosophize (it's a word) with open hearts and minds and all come to the same conclusions is not a reasonable one. Knowledge and reason can help us to understand parts of God, and this is obviously not a bad thing to do, but we are imperfect people and so this is not reasonable.

3. Mystical Experience

- "If you only have [a mystical experience] you will understand  and believe." Kreeft's blunt definition is enough to steer us from thinking this.

4. Tolerance

- Division of God's Church is a serious matter, so while loving everyone for Who they were made by is not optional, accepting that Christianity is split lacks an understanding of the Church that Christ established. Jesus himself said that He desires for His kingdom to be one, so if the kingdom on Earth is the Church, why should we be ok with a separated, not-one Church.

5. Subjectivism (Relativism)

- Your truth is cool. My truth is cool. We all have a truth but none of us has The Truth. So, truly, none of us really has a truth at all. In truth, if a truth isn't true, then it is not a truth. True? True.

6. Skepticism

- We can't ever really know who is right, so if everyone just keeps doing what they're doing we'll all be ok. This is closely related to subjectivism only instead of rejecting that there is one truth, it tries to say there's no way we can know the one Truth so we basically have to settle for our partial truths. It's a castrated relativism.

7. Rational Argument

- This helps sometimes, but persuading people only through rational argument is a ridiculous idea. Argument can help some open minds come into the Truth, but a man can spend his whole life researching arguments and dogmas only to find that he can't decide which one is right. Even if he did find the right one, God is more than just a dogma. He's a person and reason alone, while it can lead us to a person, is not the ultimate end, the person of Jesus Christ.

8. Vague Optimism

- "Something will turn up" is not an acceptable attitude to have when it comes Christ is clearly not a passive being. We are the body of Christ, so how can the head be active while the body lethargically thumbs up and sits idly. No, Christ called us to live actively by going to the ends of the Earth proclaiming the Good News.

- Also, the Body that we are all parts of is broken and bleeding. "Splitting the Church is not" as Kreeft says, "a division of subdivision in an organization, but rather an amputation of limbs." We must be active in putting ourselves back together. If we are the hands and feet of Christ, then we must pick up the pieces of the mess we've made and allow the Spirit to be the glue that holds us together. We must be actively fighting for this or we will fall into the comfortable counterfeit of active faith: passive, mind my own business, only pray on Sunday, presumptuously apathetic and secularistic apathy.


9. An Ecumenical Jihad (a temporary common enemy) 


- "Good, but not enough" We can unite for a time, and this can be very successful, but there has to be a perfect unity. This represents an imperfect unity, that is essentially a negative movement against a negative force or enemy.  God is the ultimate positive and subtracting negative one trillion is not the same as adding infinity. (I hope that doesn't just make sense in my head.)


     I think that each of these tried and failed "false grounds" for Christian unity can be considered shortcuts. They're shortcuts. God doesn't do shortcuts. It's unsure exactly how God's going to do it but we know it will be through insane amounts of grace to endure suffering and through blood. Christ's work is never without blood. We can be sure of that.

     It also can't be done without saints. Not without people who totally surrender to God. Kreeft begs to question our ability to fathom even a dozen John Paul the greats and mother theresa's around the world. We can't. It would be astoundingly beautiful. We know that much.

Let's leave the practicalities to the next installment. Dream of a world filled with saints for now.

Peace.

**Disclaimer** If there were any good ideas in here, they were most likely Dr Peter Kreeft's found on his Ecumenism talk.

Deaf to the Master?

This morning I read this : "We are Still Deaf too the Master"

He basically says we don't appreciate the musical genius of Beethoven properly. This differs from the way we treat other famed artist's work such as Shakespeare's literature. I guess he's right and I want to try to do something about it (at least in my own life) so all day I've been studying to this:

Hammerklavier (there are six  parts to it)

and this:

String Quartet Op. 127

and others but these were my favorites.

Enjoy.

Open Your Mind So We Can Suck Out Your Soul

     Open mindedness has got to be the most misunderstood concept by pretty much everybody who uses the term. I don't really get how it happened. Oh, wait! I forgot how powerful the media was for a second. Now don't get me wrong, I do NOT think that open mindedness is a bad thing. However, what we're being taught about open mindedness is incorrect, harmful and even destructive.

Question: What does having an open mind REALLY mean? 


Answer: To be open minded is to be deliberately thoughtful about everything we hear. There are gazillions of lies out there but there is also truth. So to be open minded is an active search for the truth.

     - What it is NOT is a passive state of being, which so many people think it is. These are the people who tell others that they aren't open minded. It mainly comes up when atheists condemn religion,  and when political issues arise like gay marriage or abortion. Why? Two reasons:

1) Emotion

- Emotions aren't bad; they're actually good. We naturally have feelings and thankfully they keep all us from becoming Spocks. I'm happy that we have emotions (see I used one to make a point).

- When issues like the ones I mentioned earlier arise, people get wound up really quickly. It's sad that so many lies are out there about each side, and propaganda is pushed usually by both sides at least to some degree. It's almost always propaganda aimed at emotion and not reason. Accusation is more effective in triggering emotions than logic; yelling rather than calm conversation; public attention rather than a small group or one on one.

- Another way to abuse emotion is shown perfectly on the topic I wrote about in my last article Tell Me Again How I Hate Rape Victims. Who doesn't have compassion for rape victims? Maybe only rapists and/or total jerks. Unable to resist, the pro-choice movement picked up on this lie and hammered it into people's heads that if you aren't pro-choice, you hate rape victims and women in general. To anyone who sits down with any slightly educated pro-lifer, it's obvious that this claim just isn't true.

- Things change when emotions are triggered (exponentially so if we already had trust for the source) and  the filters of our mind like common sense and logic (and philosophy if you get crazy) turn off and the brainwashing begins.

- It's natural to get riled up and lost in emotion, of course, but think about what that does to our "active' search? It slows it, often stops it in its tracks. Unfortunately, if something is not active, it's passive, right? By letting our emotions get the better of us we we turn off our minds and anyone who happens to be listening. It's very important keep emotions under control to become and remain an open minded individual.

The pride before the fall?

2) Pride


- What better tool to block someone from the truth but by the person themself. This is sort of the case with emotion, but emotion isn't all bad. Pride is all bad. Confidence is good, but pride is not. It's the line between the two that's important, and I think that the way to tell where confidence ends is to realize where  we become passive in our search for truth. It looks different in all of us. So I'll give a few examples.

- Suppose I take a position, then realize I see the truth somewhere else but am too embarrassed to admit it. That's pride.

- Suppose I assume a group of people is stupid/insane because of something about them. Then I go even further as to treat them as if I am intellectually superior, giving no thought to anything they say. I smell pride.

- Suppose I'm reading/hearing/watching something I disagree with. If I'm sitting there saying, "Wrong! Wrong!" without even trying to understand the point, much less the perspective of what being presented, then give me a merit badge cause I'm in the pride patrol.

- Suppose I argue a point repeatedly trying to convince myself that I'm right by using someone else to argue against (psh, I never do this, right mom?). Yep, that's pride.

Ok? Cool.
 
     So what are the ways that we can avoid falling into an open mind counterfeit?

     First, a truly an open mind tries to have understanding for the who and where from a fact, opinion or argument is coming. People aren't usually evil, so they often do have either good logic, faulty logic, no logic or logic clouded by emotion. It's not only helpful to actively listen to others when they talk; it's also the right thing to do.

    So, I would say then that we must develop a love for the truth. With a love for the truth, we can learn to drop both unnecessary emotion and the need to be right. That second part might seem a little contradictory to some people, but think about it. If figuring out the truth matters more to someone than proving themselves right, suddenly the pride that keeps them from admitting they were wrong is gone.

     The worst and most damaging kind of passive attitude is what some falsely label "tolerance". This idea that if someone disagrees with the way I live, then they're oppressing me and intolerant. This demand that we all embrace false "tolerance" is nothing less than discrimination. It doesn't matter what your beliefs are. Calling someone a bigot because they believe in right and wrong is slander, or at the very least ignorant. It's just incorrect unless the definition of bigot has changed too.

How is the only sin left in society to believe in sin?

The only ones who are stood against, are those who stand for something concrete?

     How bad is this attack on right and wrong for us, especially us Christians? It's the most unnatural and publicly destructive movement for the reason that 'ol Snakebite gives in Peter Kreeft's book. Sin is the only thing that is clearly and unmistakably visible to anyone who looks around on the street, flips on the news or has come into contact with even one other person at some point in life. Without the possibility of absolute truth, right and wrong are defined by humans, so they are not real in the least bit. Without being able to perceive sin there is no perceived need for salvation.

But what do I know, anyway? Not much, so that's why I'm keeping an open mind, looking for the truth constantly.

...but what if what they say is true?

                     What if there really is no truth? *gasp*

     Don't worry. I contend that it's impossible, just look at math. What does a number look like, feel like, taste like? It doesn't because it doesn't exist in the physical world just like truth. And just like math tells us that 4 is the square root of 16, we can know that there is right and wrong. It exists outside of the physical and still functions in reality as it governs every aspect of our lives. Yet, we have free will and I can say that the square root of 16 is 95 million as often as I want, but I'll be incorrect every time. In the same way, there is absolute good and evil and we can freely choose which one we want to go on. We are free to be right or wrong, but living and believing in the goodness makes as much sense as living with the understanding that 1+1=2 every time I try it, no matter how many times I try to tell it that 1+1=7 for me.

You have your truth and I have mine?

That's like saying 1+1 =2 and 1+1 =7 at the same time.

Don't be closed to truth. Open your mind.

Peace.

Awesome Guitar Never Gets Old

This is awesome.

Peace.

Tell Me Again How I Hate Rape Victims

     Why is it that every time I flip over to MSNBC I feel completely misunderstood, persecuted, slandered and ignored.

 You're probably thinking, "Don't get all emotional on us Jacob." Well, sorry.

     Seriously, I flipped the channel over to Rachel Maddow the other night because I feel I need to hear everything that's being put out there. I guess I'm a glutton for punishment in that way so it's my own fault for watching, but this one idea is a real pet peeve of mine. I truly can't stress enough just how untrue this view I'm about to reveal is. The notion I'm referring to is the one that claims that Pro-Life advocates don't care about rape and incest victims.

     The claim has been taken to my face multiple times with virtually the same conversation every time, and twice with an ultra-liberal English teacher. It goes like this.

*shocked voice* "You think that it's wrong for a rape victim to have an abortion?!" 

"Yes"

*appalled voice* "You would force her to carry the rapist's child through a pregnancy?!"

"Yes, and try to offer help as muc-"

*horrified voice* "That's horrible! And you call probably yourself a Christian, don't you?!" *sneer*

     But then no one actually listens to why. Why are pro-lifers against abortion in the first place? Is the pro-life movement just a huge reversion back to pre-19th Amendment days? Just a massive undertaking by men and women both who want to take away the rights of women?

NO! People who insinuate this are lying!

What are truly pro-life people fighting for? Let's make a brief list. 

1) To end abortion because it is killing a person, and human life is sacred (though pretty much no one know what that word "sacred" means anymore).

2) To end distribution of abortifacient drugs. Those cause abortion too. Consistency is necessary, so this is not an optional view for any pro-lifer.

3) To end the death penalty where possible. All human life is sacred, so anyone who is truly pro-"life" would never support a punitive death penalty.

4) To aid all current/future/possible mothers in every feasible way so as to protect the life of the child and to give the mother the support she needs to carry the baby to term.

Wow, that sounds "surprisingly" positive. 

     Yes, rape victims should carry their babies to term, but by no means should they do it alone. The situation isn't the issue though. As much dignity, love and care as we owe to the pregnant victim, we owe the same dignity, love and care to that human life inside her. Why? Because it's is human, and alive just as much as you and I are. No one can deny that fact because biology proves it. It has a full set of human DNA and is living and growing from the very moment of conception.

But the mother will have to carry a living reminder of the worst moments of her life for 9 months!?
- - Would you rather her turn herself from a victim into a predator?

Ok, it's alive, but it's not a person. It doesn't have rights.
- - Really? What if you're wrong? We've been wrong about this kind of thing before haven't we? In Andre Schutten's article "Do we know what's human? We've been wrong before", he gives us a few examples of that.

1) “In the eyes of the law… the slave is not a person.” - Virginia Supreme Court, 1858

2) “An Indian is not a person within the meaning of the Constitution.” - George Canfield, American Law Review, 1881

3) The meaning of “qualified persons” does not include women. - Supreme Court of Canada, 1928

4) “The Reichsgericht itself refused to recognize Jews… as ‘persons’ in the legal sense.” - German Supreme Court decision, 1936

5) “The law of Canada does not recognize the unborn child as a legal person possessing rights.” - Supreme Court of Canada, 1997


    Wow, so what if the government is wrong again on deciding who has personhood and who doesn't get the human rights they deserve? Who is actually "behind the times" and will hopefully soon make their way through the swamps of delusion into the currently disregarded truth.

But her situation should allow her to choose what to do with her own body?
- - I won't disagree that she can do what she wants with her body, but let's look at her situation in relation to the other human life still in the picture that is so often disregarded as inconsequential. We shall look at this through Pascal's lens as it is focused for our eyes by Peter Kreeft. Kreeft begins by making the important distinction between life and personhood. Plants and animals are alive, but aren't persons deserving rights.

     From there we must ask the question, "Is the human fetus a person?" There are two possibilities: yes or no. By taking one of these positions all of us are either right or wrong. Are you with me so far? So, by looking at these facts objectively we can derive that there are four options as seen in this nifty chart I made:

One by one let's look at the possibilities.

     ~ Upper Left: If the human fetus is a person and we're sure of it then abortion is murder. So, no matter what abortion is wrong.

     ~ Upper Right: The human fetus is a person but we're either not sure or we think it's not a person. Killing a fetus in this situation is like running over a man shaped pile of clothes with a car that actually turns out to be a man. This would be manslaughter, and it is wrong.

     ~ Lower Left: In this situation we have some way of knowing for sure that the human fetus is not a person, and so it wouldn't have rights and abortion would not be wrong.

     ~ Lower Right: The human fetus is not a person but we don't know for sure. Even in this case abortion is a criminal and morally impermissible act. The act would be the same as shooting a gun into a bush or fumigating a room that may or may not be occupied by a person. These actions are criminally negligent by legal standards and morally defined as unacceptable action. The clothes analogy applies here as well.

     We see that logic is 75% against abortion and a shaky 25% for it and this is completely objectively. That 25% is also unusable as evidence since the science can't prove otherwise and even if it could abortion wouldn't be a good thing. Abortion would be wrong to encourage even in that situation because by being what develops into a person it deserves at least some dignity.

     So Rachel Maddow, Chris Matthews and Andrea Mitchell, please stop saying pro-lifers hate rape victims. It's just a outright lie. In contrast to what you tell people about us, we love every human life and we certainly want the very best care for all rape victims in their terrible circumstances. BUT, the ends don't justify the means. Situations outside the womb don't change the very real situation inside the womb. 

I realize it's all driven politics but since when does that make lying about the other side ok? Never, but people always seem to think it does. We can't tolerate this. 

It's propaganda driven mind control. Escape it.

Peace.

Starring Ruth as the Bride

Please take the time to read this article on the an image of the Church in the book of Ruth. Trust me when I say it is worth your time. Far more worth your time than anything I write.

Peace.

Talent + Pipes

This is really cool.

That's all.

Winning!! (I have martyr's blood)

Read this article. I know I haven't proved to be consistent in my posting but this has to be one of the best Catholic blog articles I've had the pleasure of reading in a long time.

3 Failed Attempts to Troll the Catholic Church

I seriously couldn't have said it better than Marc (or even close to as well at all), but there are a few things I'd love to add in my own inferior writing style.

This is the awesome thing about being a Christian and (more specifically, with an even greater roar) a Catholic! The Catholic Church can't be stopped for a few simple reasons:

------------------------------------- (1) --------------------------------------

We are the body of Christ. Christ is God and God can't lose. Trying to beat God would be like the whack-a-mole machine whacking the inventor of the whack-a-mole game machine...it can't happen because the inventor made it so that he could whack moles.

That was not a very good analogy for God's love, but you get the point: God wins so it must follow that God's Church wins.

------------------------------------- (2) --------------------------------------

Just because the Church is awesome doesn't mean it's not going to see hard times where it looks like we might fail. Suffering is redemptive and "pain shifts our focus from what is trivial to what is crucial" as Ennie Hickman would say. I love the fact that God humbles the people in His Church every so often. It's so easy to look at the Israelites in Scripture and call them a bunch of whiny babies, then forget that we are whining about our religious freedoms and gas prices and  constantly right now.

I think God's asking, "How much are you willing to give up for Me? Am I crucial in your life, or am I trivial?" Life is a big YES with little no's to everything that is not God.

------------------------------------- (3) --------------------------------------

We are led by the Truth, and therefore cannot be led astray. Now, He's letting us get bitten by the snakes a bit so that we have to look to Him lest we be swallowed by our currently ravenous culture that has an edacious hunger which cannot be satisfied without an ideological totalitarian monarchy over both (a) focused temperance and (b) the conscience by the relentless attack of Satan. (breathe in - breathe out) This attack is one of pride in the form of  (a) total indulgence without consequence and  (b) a denial of any truth that claims to not accept lies. There is only one Truth, and that truth don't accept NO lies.

------------------------------------- (4) --------------------------------------

Who is the only flawless masterpiece that perfectly directs the attention of her children always heavenward? 

Who gets to hold her creator in the arms He made her? 

What arms are better suited for holding the rest of the broken children of God than the ones that held the scourged Son of God?

Who better to look to than to Mary as we feebly mutter our imperfect yes's than the one who spoke with utmost integrity and love, "Behold, I am the handmaid of the Lord. Be it done unto me according to thy word."

With Mary as our mother and model, let's pray.

Peace.

Lenten Reflection (I couldn't come up with a more generic title)

Ok, so we're deep into Lent so I was trying to evaluate my Lenten "progress" (...that's an overly simplistic way of putting it). But really, did I get the ashes, take a shower and go on with my life as usual just minus a few drinks or sweets, of course. How do I take a look at how Lent is transforming my interior life and manifesting in my ways of living the exterior Christian life.

Here's a few things that I came up with to ask myself:



1) Has there been a change for the better in my prayer? Not so much in content or feelings received from praying as much as more effort and desire put toward being in prayer. I think that this is one way to see if I am personally making the sacrifice of time that I need to be making for the Lord.

2) Have I complained a bunch about my fasting or brought it up as often as I could in conversation? Fasting isn't really fasting if we're complaining about it. How can the glory of fasting go to God if all the attention of fasting is on me. Not only am I turning my own attention away from God, but I'm pridefully turning the attention of others toward myself in a time meant solely for growing closer to God. I think that's feasting in irony/vanity; not fasting in humility.

3) Have I given any alms at all? The third thing Lent is about shouldn't be forgotten, even by so-called "poor college kids". I think if we fast correctly, then giving what we save in fasting should make almsgiving easy. It doesn't though. All of the sudden there are so many other opportunities to spend money where we couldn't before. No more of that. Give in humility and trust that God will do good with the gift.

4) Do I have a beard yet? Men, this is too often overlooked as a necessary component of Lent. Grow one. (Don't let this take away from the sincerity of my other questions.)

5) Have I done a reflection on the stations of the cross? Although this isn't explicitly mentioned as a necessary part of Lent, I see no better way to prepare for to join in Christ's sacrifice than to meditate on the depth of that very sacrifice. As He goes to His death, so we go to ours. As He rises victorious, we are raised by His victory.

Hope this helps a bit.

Perspective (Read it. It's short)

     I'm a little embarrassed at how much truth I've forgotten in a time of struggling. How can we read the Scripture and despair? What's so bad about a little bit of rough time? Last night I had a little bit of an awakening in my perspective. I've had hints of it but I let my worry push it away. I was at Adore and Ennie reminded everyone there that the battle is already won. That us Catholics should be the most joyful people in the world right now. Why? Cause when the going gets rough, that's when God's getting us ready and doing something big.

Read these: Numbers 21, John 3:14-16 (16 means so much more in context)

There's online Bibles. Pull this one up: NAB Bible
(No excuses now)

     When our pain is lifted up in front of us so that we have to focus on it, that's when our focus is the most fine tuned. When we look at Jesus lifted on the cross, even though we've been bitten by the serpent and even though we've willingly let the serpent to bite us, we don't die and we certainly don't despair.

"Pain shifts our gaze from what is trivial to what is crucial." - Ennie

We need to truly understand that God is the victor to have real hope. There's just a light at the end of the tunnel that we can barely see, but we've already been told what the light is. We know the ending so worry is is vain.

Pope Benedict XVI said that "We are not made for comfort; we are made for greatness."

Let's believe in that today.

We Hold These Truths || Spoken Word

Awesome.

A few thoughts on the desire for control

"The White House seems to think we bishops simply do not know or understand Catholic teaching and so, taking a cue from its own definition of religious freedom, now has nominated its own handpicked official Catholic teachers."


     Cardinal Dolan said this in reaction to a sit down he had with White House officials. In the meeting, the White House essentially tried to convince the Catholic authorities present (who were chosen by the USCCB) that they were and continue to be wrong in their interpretation of THEIR OWN Catholic beliefs! In brief, Catholics should get with the times. Also, it has been made clear that any adjustment, exception or compromise is off the table. This might seem oversimplified, but it's the truth.


     Ok, so how can we look at this and understand what's going on here. What have we seen throughout history that there seems to be a norm in relation to power as it is found in daily life as well as in politics. It is one of our prideful human flaws to exercise power that we find ourselves in possession of and expecting others to accept it. Not only that, but when we get a little taste of power we often desire more of it so that we can have a firmer grip and a fuller control over whatever it is that we already control. Now, before you say, "Not me!" just hear me out and I think that you'll find it's not only true, but that it is possible to resist this temptation through a loving perspective.


     Take, for example, one of the most potentially beautiful/destructive categories of relationships: siblings. The older sibling finds him/herself in a situation of power and while this is important to note it doesn't give the older sibling the right to control the younger sibling. Yet, without fail, every older sibling I have ever met has at some time sought to control different parts of their younger counterpart's lives. Granted many of these things are small, like snagging the last cookie away from the younger brother cause he, "Had too many already...". Silly, but it's part of control. Be it through verbal manipulation, scare tactics, the old "I'll tell if you do/don't" or the even older brute force strategy, the desire to mold the will of the other to one's match one's own will is seen manifested clearly and uncontroversially in siblings and that's why I chose this example. With four younger siblings, I confess that have used these and more in my selfish actions and it is these types of actions that deny my siblings at least part of their free will.


     We see this in every stage of life, be it in high school when popularity is power, in the workforce where money, position and influence are power, in abusive marriages where strength and the ability to provide security (outside of abuse) can be power, in politics where political office, media platform and money are power and in the divisions of the international world where military power provides the means of control. Why does this seem to be a natural tendency and why is it wrong to want to control people in the first place?


     This is where that loving perspective I mentioned earlier comes in. In order to take a "love"ing perspective, we must first ask the question of what love is? The very best and most concise definition of love that I've ever heard is the one I've gotten from a St Mary's Campus Minister for Texas A&M Marcel LeJeune and it is this:

"Love is willing only good for another, despite the cost to oneself"

     Short and easy to remember, but also very deep. I should note that willing the good of others includes action and not simply good intentions. Now, what is the one factor that goes into love that, without it, love has no possibility to exist or even to grow into existence? Selflessness can be developed. Courage can be mustered up. Good intentions can come to be through empathy, but what is the one thing that is absolutely essential for love to exist? 

     It's free will. Love simply cannot exist without the presence of free will. Why else would God allow us to sin? Why would he let us turn away from Him even though it is better for us to choose God and to praise Him in everything we do. God doesn't need praise; we do.  So what we can understand is that IF God made us and was controlling our every move so that we did not sin, it would mean that we would have no free will then we would not be our own persons but only extensions of God. That would mean that God doesn't love us. "Gasp!" "Kill the heretic!" Hear me out.


     The thing about God is that He does love us, and Jesus is living, dying and rising proof of that. Love can't exist without the allowing of the free will of the one being loved. It follows then, if love is impossible without free will and the permission of free will, that where love doesn't exist a loving perspective is impossible. Confused yet?


     So how does this all relate back to the desire for control? Well, basically what I've been getting at is that with a loving perspective we are able to withdraw from the want to control others so that they can experience freedom. 


     Freedom. If our country was founded on a single value or idea, it was freedom. It was liberty. It was the ability to know that we will be free to live our lives as citizens of the United States, made up of people from all over the world with every different faith. There can also be peace between people of all faiths and non-faiths. That we can live together without having our free will be stripped away. This is what the United States was made to mean but the desire for control is gripping those who find themselves in positions of power. 


     Some people within multiple branches of our government do not see that the beliefs Catholics profess against contraception are beliefs that can be considered permissible. This is an undermining of the most important principle that our country was founded and it is a result of some who have power who refuse to respect my faith and the faith of over a billion. 


     So, what our government lacks is a loving perspective or even a tolerant perspective, but I don't blame the government because they are a reflection of us as a culture. A culture that wants to be purely secular and many of those (many of us) who have faith are too embarrassed about our religious beliefs to boldly defend them. I think that all of this represents a spiritual and intellectual immaturity, and ultimately it boils down to the desire for control.  Spiritually, we have no understanding of what true love is, and even less of a will to carry it out. Intellectually, we can't see that historically and logically when the state starts taking away freedom, little by little the country will take more and more control. We can see this in any relationship where an entity with power uses it to control a weaker or less devious entity.


     You know how people say power is addictive? Well, I think I think they're slightly off. I think it's control that's addictive. It's not the ability that people crave. It's exercising control to better their own cause that drives the desire to control. I could write about this forever but I think one thing needs to be said.


Control is not freedom. The forced buying of anything, much less something believed to be evil is not freedom.


No Freedom = No Love


Lovelessness = Godlessness


Godlessness = Serious Problems for Everybody

St Padre Pio's Body

This is one of the most amazing things you will ever see: an incorruptible. The body of a saint that does not decay.

This is the link!!

Where Have all the Good Times Gone?

Bible verse theme of the day:


     "And the seventh angel sounded; and there followed great voices in heaven, and they said, 'For the kingdom of this world, it shall become the kingdom of our Lord and of His Christ. And He shall reign forever and ever more.' " Revelation 11:15

In related news:


     Sometimes I freak out about our world and how I feel like it's going down the drain. Sometimes it feels like there is no hope and while I try to trust in God I fall short too often and take on a despairing attitude with which I bring those around me to the level I'm at. That is the dumbest thing we can do at a time like this, when it feels like our freedom is being stripped away and that no one is on our side.


      I was reminded of how to combat this perspective a few days ago of this by a witty tweet off twitter that lifted my attitude to a more acceptable and hopeful level. Ennie Hickman tweeted:

"Historically, when it gets bumpy, God is up to something big. Don't worry, trust in Him and enjoy the show."

     How true and insightful. I'm not sure, but I would say that Ennie posts things online that he feels he needs o hear himself, but that might help others find a little truth. I think we need to do the same thing. We need to tell ourselves something like this and actually believe it. Stuff like this pumps me up because it (1) let's me know that other people are feeling the same way as me and (2) gives me the right perspective as far as how to approach whatever it is that is in the way of life at each moment. Then Ennie put this gem up today:

"On the Mount, God says "It's about to get crazy, but fear not. I got this." I need to be reminded that He hasn't exited His throne in 2012."

     God hasn't left his throne. Duh. When I hear that I do a face palm and think how great of a God we have. He is on His throne and the kingdom of this world will indeed become one in the same with God's kingdom. He's got this, there is nothing to worry about and the fact that I worry and stress just tells me that I don't trust God enough. By this, I'm reminded of the first chapter of J.R.R. Tolkein's "The Silmarillion". It's basically a cosmology and creation story that I'll briefly summarize.

     Where do I start besides with Illuvatar, or Eru, who is the God character and he is the supreme creator and director of all things. Secondly, we have the Ainur who are Tolkein's angel characters and who play in Illuvatar's symphony. One of these, is Melkor, who is the Lucifer character. This is an almost insulting to the book in it's simplistic explanation, but basically Illuvatar conducts the Ainur in a masterful harmonic symphony. Every noise fits in perfectly with all the rest and nothing seems out of place. Simply put: it's beautiful. Then, Melkor proceeds to have thoughts not aligned with Illuvatar's set directing which he "weaves into his music". There is immediate discord and chaos in the music and many of the Ainur are thrown off by this and many even join in the Melkor's own devious theme. To this Illuvatar just begins directing his own theme that he had not previously revealed and Melkor's discord and chaos, to his dismay, became once again perfectly in tune with the music and the plan of the great maestro. 

     When I read this for the first time, it blew me away and I loved it because the who time Illuvatar is in control. So too is God always in control. What do we have to worry about when we know that God has read the ending of the story. He knows exactly what is going to happen and not only that but he planned it from the beginning. We all all just a single measure in the symphony that God has written and completed. All the chaos will happen but it's nothing the Divine Author hasn't seen. There's not a single being out there powerful enough to affect the grand finale that is God's victory. No one gets to change the ending of the last chapter that's already written into eternity. It's done. It's over, we just get to "enjoy the show" now.

P.S.  Not only is it done, but it's a really freaking good song.

Priests are Legit

Statements like "you'd better knock us out now cause you've awakened a sleeping giant" pump me up and remind me first of my mom explaining how the Church works to me but also of a few metaphors for the Catholic Church which are both frustrating as well as powerfully inspiring.

     The Church is like a glacier. It moves oh....soooo......slowly.... in pretty much all of it's actions, decisions and rulings. Like a glacier though, the movement is constant and unchanging flattening anything in it's path. However I'll clarify for fear of being too simplistic. Has any nation survived as long or successfully as the Church? No. So it's more of an outlasting than a flattening.

     The Church is also like the Ents from J. R. R. Tolkein's "The Lord of the Rings". They take forever to decide what to do and yet when they are forced into action Saruman, the servant of the evil one, stands no chance at all. Notice that by the provocation of the Ents by the burning down of the forrest Saruman brings the Wrath of the Ents, who were frustratingly predisposed to inaction. When the Church, then, sees the burning of souls by servants of the evil one, have no fear, the Church will release the dams and the waters of the Holy Spirit will rush into the world. How this will manifest itself, we shall see in due time. It might take longer than we want, but that's the nature of the Church, and ultimately...it's not about us. This was obviously an intentional symbolic metaphor by the Catholic Tolkein.

Homily Response to the Mandate

This is a lesson in preaching the truth.

     Now, I'm not a political guru and I never claim to be the smartest man in the room, but I do see the obvious. I think most of us see the obvious. What is happening right now is wrong and we need to get fired up about it. There should be some righteous anger, but before we go activist let's all remember Matthew 5:44: "But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you."

     Make no mistake the Church is being persecuted, but our first action in response to this needs to be to pray for those attempting to impose so blatantly on our liberties. Love is always our goal but hate and/or sin can never be a means.

     With that said, I just want to put an excerpt from an awesome blog called Bad Catholic and this is directed at Protestants. This doesn't just impose on our rights as Catholics, but it tramples upon all Christian beliefs, at least according to the founders of the first few Protestant denominations. These are a few possible responses to the biblical argument that contraception is wrong.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

A) But Jesus changed all that!


Really, where in the Bible does he take back this particular divine action? The Early Church certainly couldn’t tell:


“Because of its divine institution for the propagation of man, the seed is not to be vainly ejaculated, nor is it to be damaged, nor is it to be wasted” (A.D. 195, Clement of Alexandria, The Instructor of Children 2:10:91:2).


“…on account of their prominent ancestry and great property, the so-called faithful [certain Christian women who had affairs with male servants] want no children from slaves or lowborn commoners, [so] they use drugs of sterility or bind themselves tightly in order to expel a fetus which has already been engendered” (A.D 255, Hippolytus of Rome, Refutation of All Heresies 9:12).


B) But the Early Church was all corrupted by Catholicism, Martin Luther reformed all that!


Actually, Martin Luther was much meaner about the whole contraception issue than any one I’ve read so far.


“[T]he exceedingly foul deed of Onan, the basest of wretches . . . is a most disgraceful sin. It is far more atrocious than incest and adultery. We call it unchastity, yes, a sodomitic sin. For Onan goes in to her; that is, he lies with her and copulates, and when it comes to the point of insemination, spills the semen, lest the woman conceive. Surely at such a time the order of nature established by God in procreation should be followed. Accordingly, it was a most disgraceful crime. . . . Consequently, he deserved to be killed by God. He committed an evil deed. Therefore, God punished him.” (Luther’s Works, Vol. 5, p.332)


C) But John Calvin–


Nope. “Deliberately avoiding the intercourse, so that the seed drops on the ground, is doubly horrible. For this means that one quenches the hope of his family…” (John Calvin, Commentary on Genesis.)


D) But John Wesley–


Stop that. “Those sins that dishonor the body are very displeasing to God, and the evidence of vile affections. Observe, the thing which he [Onan] did displeased the Lord—and it is to be feared; thousands, especially of single persons, by this very thing, still displease the Lord, and destroy their own souls.”


E) But some one –


No. Not one, single Protestant denomination before the 1930′s held that the use of artificial contraception was anything but sinful. May I ask, what on earth has changed, besides the fact that we now live in a culture that really, really wants birth control?


D) But I —


Precisely.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Read Marc's whole article here. 

     You see. We're all in this together. We need to unite in prayer. Then unite in action. This is a scary situation so we can't afford to be divided on this anymore.

We're not looking at the Constitution?

If this doesn't scare you, I don't know what will? 

Great article from Aggie Catholic Blog

Cardinal Dolan's update on the fight against the HHS mandate. He's really standing up for us here.

(I stole the pic from the article too.)