Sunday, April 20, 2014

Bishop’s ‘surprise’ at Vatican poll findings

Nearly 50 per cent of Maltese accept and live by the Church’s teachings on responsible birth control but find it difficult to follow, according to a survey that forms part of a worldwide Vatican initiative.
Just over a quarter disagree with the Church on its natural family planning method that considers abstinence morally correct during a woman’s fertile period.
Nearly 20 per cent ignore the Church’s stand on birth control and act according to their conscience. The Sunday Times of Malta got a preview of the local study carried out last year at Pope Francis’s request to gauge opinion on the Church’s teachings on thorny moral issues ahead of October’s Bishop’s Synod.

Thursday, April 17, 2014

Is Notre Dame's Fr. Jenkins really fighting the HHS mandate?


Notre Dame Alumni: Fr. Jenkins Comments on 

HHS Mandate ‘Startling’...

Notre DameNotre Dame alumni group Sycamore Trust recently contrasted the University’s claim in court that the HHS mandate “would require Notre Dame to commit scandal” with President Fr. John Jenkins’ comments from a recent student Town Hall event that, “I don’t see this as a scandal because we are not giving out contraceptives.”
At the beginning of this year, the University named after Our Lady announced it would comply with the mandate which requires employees of the University to be covered for abortifacients, contraception, and sterilization procedures.  The University continues to seek relief from the HHS mandate in the courts.
Fr. Jenkins said, according to The Irish Rover, “We feel this is an infringement on religious freedom, but we have a variety of factors to consider, like legitimate government authority.” He reportedly added, “I don’t see this as a scandal because we are not giving out contraceptives.”
The alumni group Sycamore Trust juxtaposed Fr. Jenkins’ comment with Notre Dame’s claims in court, specifically arguing, “[T]he mandate would require Notre Dame to commit scandal.” The alumni group, which is committed to promoting Notre Dame’s Catholic identity, called Fr. Jenkins’ comment “startling.”

Read more





Saturday, April 12, 2014

Fr. Hesse on the Muslims & Vatican II

Jesus didn’t care about being nice or tolerant, and neither should you


jesus_money
There is no shortage of heresies these days.
If you want to adopt some blasphemous, perverted, fun house mirror reflection of Christianity, you will find a veritable buffet of options. You can sift through all the variants and build your own little pet version of the Faith. It’s Ice Cream Social Christianity: make your own sundae! (Or Sunday, as it were.)
And, of all the heretical choices, probably the most common — and possibly the most damaging — is what I’ve come to call the Nice Doctrine.
The propagators of the Nice Doctrine can be seen and heard from anytime any Christian takes any bold stance on any cultural issue, or uses harsh language of any kind, or condemns any sinful act, or fights against evil with any force or conviction at all. As soon as he or she stands and says ‘This is wrong, and I will not compromise,’ the heretics swoop in with their trusty mantras.
They insist that Jesus was a nice man, and that He never would have done anything to upset people. They say that He came down from Heaven to preach tolerance and acceptance, and He wouldn’t have used words that might lead to hurt feelings. They confidently sermonize about a meek and mild Messiah who was born into this Earthly realm on a mission to spark a constructive dialogue.
The believers in Nice Jesus are usually ignorant of Scripture, but they do know that He was ‘friends with prostitutes,’ and once said something about how, like, we shouldn’t get too ticked off about stuff, or whatever. In their minds, he’s essentially a supernatural Cheech Marin.
Read the comments under my previous post about gay rights militants, and you’ll see this heresy illustrated.
That post prompted an especially noteworthy email from someone concerned that I’m not being ‘Christlike,’ because I ‘call people names.’ He said, in part:
“You aren’t spreading Christianity when you talk like that. The whole message of Jesus was that we should be nice to people because we want them to be nice to us. That’s how we can all be happy. Period. It’s that simple.”
Be nice to me, I’ll be nice to you, and we’ll all be happy. This is the ‘whole message’ of Christianity?
Really?
Jesus Christ preached a Truth no deeper or more complex than a slogan on a poster in a Kindergarten classroom?
Really?
A provocative claim, to say the least. I decided to investigate the matter, and sure enough, I found this excerpt from the Sermon on the Mount:
“We’re best friends like friends should be. With a great big hug, and a kiss from me to you, won’t you say you love me too?”
Actually, wait, sorry, that’s from the original Barney theme song.
God help us. We’ve turned the Son of God into a purple dinosaur puppet.
untitled-42
There’s no way to be certain, but most theologians believe that, despite popular perception, Christ looked nothing like this.
I don’t recognize this Jesus.
This moderate. This pacifist. This nice guy.
He’s not the Jesus I read about in the Bible. I read of a strong, manly, stern, and bold Savior. Compassionate, yes. Forgiving, of course. Loving, always loving. But not particularly nice.
He condemned. He denounced. He caused trouble. He disrupted the established order.
On one occasion — or at least one recorded occasion — He used violence. This Jesus saw the money changers in the temple and how did He respond? He wasn’t polite about it. I’d even say He was downright intolerant. He fashioned a whip (this is what the lawyers would call ‘premeditation’) and physically drove the merchants away. He turned over tables and shouted. He caused a scene. [John 2:15]
Assault with a deadly weapon. Vandalism. Disturbing the peace. Worse still, intolerance.
In two words: not nice.
Not nice at all.
Can you imagine how some moderate, pious, ‘nice’ Christians of today would react to that spectacle in the Temple? Can you envision the proponents of the Nice Doctrine, with their wagging fingers and their passive aggressive sighs? I’m sure they’d send Jesus a patronizing email, perhaps leave a disapproving comment under the news article about the incident, reminding Jesus that Jesus would never do what Jesus just did.
Personally, I’ve studied the New Testament and found not a single instance of Christ calling for a ‘dialogue’ with evil or seeking the middle ground on an issue. I see an absolutist, unafraid of confrontation. I see a man who did not waver or give credence to the other side. I see someone who never once avoided a dispute by saying that He’ll just ‘agree to disagree.’
I see a Christ who calls the Scribes and Pharisees snakes and vipers. He labels them murderers and blind guides, and ridicules them publicly [Matthew 23:33]. He undermines their authority. He insults them. He castigates them. He’s not very nice to them.
Jesus rebukes and condemns. In Matthew 18, He utilizes morbid and violent imagery, saying that it would be better to drown in the sea with a stone around your neck than to harm a child. Had our modern politicians been around two thousand years ago, I’m sure they’d go on the cable news shows and shake their heads and insist that there’s ‘no place for that kind of language.’
No place for the language of God.
Jesus deliberately did and said things that He knew would upset people. He stirred up division and controversy. He provoked. He didn’t have to break from established customs, but He did. He didn’t have to heal that man’s hand on the Sabbath, knowing how it would disturb others and cause them immense irritation, but He did, and He did so with ‘anger’ [Mark 3:5]. He could have gone with the flow a little bit. He could have chilled out and let bygones be bygones, but He didn’t. He could have been diplomatic, but He wasn’t.
He could have told everyone to relax, but instead He made them uncomfortable. He could have put them at ease, but He chose to put them on edge.
He convinced the mob not to stone the adulterer [John 8], and you’ll notice that He then turned to her and told her to stop sinning. Indeed, never once did He encounter sin and corruption and say: “Hey, do your thang, homies. Just have fun. YOLO!”
The followers of Nice Jesus love to quote the ‘throw the first stone’ verse — and for good reason, it’s a beautiful and compelling story — but you rarely hear mention of the exchange that occurs just a few sentences later, in that very same chapter. In John 8:44, Jesus rebukes unbelieving Jews and calls them ‘sons of the Devil.’
Wow.
That wasn’t nice, Jesus.

Read more at http://joeforamerica.com/2014/04/jesus-didnt-care-nice-tolerant-
neither/#1yFWe78cLeukoV7P.99

Married men could be ordained priests if World's Bishops agree on it!!!


Sure, celibacy is “disciplinary”, but then, so is …




In the wake of the latest off-hand, private, ambiguous, papal comment to be trumpeted around the world as a harbinger of impending change, I note that, for the proverbial umpteenth time, solemn heads are nodding in agreement that clerical celibacy is “merely disciplinary.” Good grief, everyone knows that. The question is not whether clerical celibacy is “merely disciplinary”—unquestionably it is; rather, the question is, What does it mean to designate an institute or practice as “merely disciplinary”?
In Catholic circles the phrase “merely disciplinary” conjures up things like the Communion fast or giving up meat on Fridays. In a very well-read crowd, perhaps the directing of bishops to make ad limina visits or requiring canonical form for marriage would be recognized (and rightly) as “merely disciplinary”. Now, provided one means by the technical phrase “merely disciplinary” that the institute or practice in question could be changed, even eliminated, without the Church ceasing to be the Church, then yes, Friday abstinence, ad limina visits, and clerical celibacy are all “merely disciplinary.”
But, considered from that technical perspective, there are very few things about the Church that aren’t “merely disciplinary”, that is, there are very few things in the Church that, when push comes to shove, are essential to her existence. An episcopal hierarchy would make the short list of non-negotiables, as would the seven sacraments. Eliminate the hierarchy and the Church ceases to exist, jettison even one sacrament from the Church and whatever that institution would be, it couldn’tbe the Church founded by Christ.
So, yes, eliminate clerical celibacy and the Church would still be, in essence, the Church founded by Christ. No one can plausibly dispute that narrow claim. But those pushing for the elimination of clerical celibacy, touting the fact that it is “merely disciplinary”, should advise their audiences that, by the very same token, many other things could be eliminated in the Church as well, including:
• the Sunday obligation (not to mention all holy days)
Continue reading 

Monday, April 7, 2014

Brothers Grimm Fairy Tales Come To Life In Eerie Photography Project

Take a stroll through the forests and woodlands of Middle Europe today, and it doesn't take long before you begin to imagine yourself as a character in a centuries-old Brothers Grimm story. Be it "Little Red Riding Hood" or "Hansel and Gretel," it only takes a patch of fog and a thick strip of blackened trees to transport you into the setting of a fairy tale past, elevating your pulse and reminding you why Jacob and Wilhelm reigned supreme in the world of terrifyingly gorgeous children's literature.
grimm1
Cologne, Germany-based photographer Kilian Schönberger knows this better than most. He grew up with the misty landscapes in his backyard, producing memories that inspired his artistic work -- particularly his "Brothers Grimm's Homeland" series. In it, Schönberger captures the chilly horror hidden inside an abandoned farmhouse or the overwhelming mystery of a moss-covered path leading beyond the horizon. His photographic illustrations bring the Grimm tales to life, proving that the brothers' folklore can muster goosebumps in both children and adults.
grimm2
Schönberger's photographs are certainly dark, conjuring the more sinister images associated with "Sleeping Beauty" and "Pied Piper of Hamelin." The effects of his photos could be heightened by the fact that the photographer is color blind.
"I think colour blindness (I can't distinguish green from red, magenta from grey, violet from blue and so on) [sic] can be an advantage especially in forest environments," the artist explained in an interview with Seamless Photo. "I don't have to separate singular colours visually and can totally concentrate on the structure for a convincing image composition. Forests are always quite chaotic places -- therefore I think the structures are more important for a pleasant result than the colours."
grimm3
Scroll through a preview of "Brothers Grimm's Homeland" below and let us know your thoughts on the whimsical work in the comments.
grimm16
grimm4
grimm7
grimm10
grimm11
grimm14
grimm19
grimm5
grimm18

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/07/brothers-grimm-homeland_n_4550804.html

Tuesday, April 1, 2014

Amnesty Mass: Cardinal O’Malley, US Bishops Re- create Lampedusa in Nogales

Mass at US-Mexico Border to 

Highlight Plight of Migrants


Image
(Photo) Indelible seal of the Sacrament of Baptism “reaffirmed” by a female Protestant ministerette
 (ZENIT) –  U.S. bishops are inviting Catholic faithful to join with them in spotlighting the need for immigration policy reform, as Cardinal Sean O’Malley of Boston and other prelates celebrate a Mass on Tuesday in memory of the thousands of migrants who have lost their lives trying to cross the Arizona desert.
 The Mass on the Boarder and “Mission for Migrants” in Nogales, Arizona, is reminiscent of Pope Francis’ first trip outside the Vatican, to the island of Lampedusa, in memory of the many migrants who’ve died trying to cross from Africa to Europe.
The Mass on the Border will be streamed live on April 1, at 9 a.m. (PT) /12 p.m. (ET). It can be followed on YouTube at: www.youtube.com/watch?v=CqY9GcA6lCA.
The US episcopal conference’s Committee on Migration recommends prayer and fasting for the plight of migrants and immigration policy reform, as well as some concrete actions:
•  By advocating for immigration reform sending an electronic postcard to members of Congress. Or by using the toll free number: 1-855-589-5698 to “support a path to citizenship and oppose the SAFE Act.” 
•  By fasting in solidarity with migrants and immigrants. Fasting turns peoples’ attention away from their own needs and allows them to open their hearts to the suffering of others.
•  By spreading the word via social media, using the Twitter hashtag #BorderMass and following the latest developments on Facebook and Twitter. 
•  More resources for prayers and Masses, a link to the electronic postcards and the Mass on the Border live stream can be found at: www.justiceforimmigrants.org. More information on the event can be found at: www.usccb.org/about/migration-policy/mass-on-the-border.cfm
Related link