Wednesday, May 29, 2013
Be Thou My Vision
so something else doesn't get in my eyes.
Do you know the online movie go to place FANDOR (like Netflicks). It has great independent and Foreign movies. There is a great one out now containing one filmakers vision of Saint Sebastian, in Italian and subtitled. Worth watching if you are tired of all the gloating persecutions against people who think lascivious lusts of the flesh just might have contributed to the fall of the Roman Empire. read gay marriage (sort of). Saint Sebastian pray for us all.
http://www.fandor.com/films/sebastiane
CLICK HERE http://www.fandor.com/films/sebastiane
(warning, lots of male nudity, which i rather like)
Do you know the online movie go to place FANDOR (like Netflicks). It has great independent and Foreign movies. There is a great one out now containing one filmakers vision of Saint Sebastian, in Italian and subtitled. Worth watching if you are tired of all the gloating persecutions against people who think lascivious lusts of the flesh just might have contributed to the fall of the Roman Empire. read gay marriage (sort of). Saint Sebastian pray for us all.
http://www.fandor.com/films/sebastiane
CLICK HERE http://www.fandor.com/films/sebastiane
(warning, lots of male nudity, which i rather like)
Monday, May 27, 2013
Saturday, May 25, 2013
You Will Find An Open Door There
The Eighth Sacrament
There is none. That was the Pope's message. There are people who wish to control the faith rather than facilitate it.
There are people who want to create an additional Sacrament in addition to the seventh of church custom (not scripturally sound or rooted) but just embedded with the bigotries and prejudice of church practices as they want to practice them. I would add (the paranoias and litigation risk managements)
A single mother goes to a church secretary and wants to baptize her child. The secretary acts all haughty and shuns the mother because she is an unwed sinner. The Pope blasts the proverbial church secretary here and says basically- you prefer she send the child back to its maker? This is one example he offers of church people going well outside their mission- WHAT ARE YOU PEOPLE DOING?
He says there are Seven Sacraments- when you do this you fabricate an eighth. Its insane. And harmful. Stop it.
The church doors should always be open - they should be open for EVERYONE to meet Jesus, to pray, to adore the eucharist.
You will find an open door there- it's the verse of a song. Its also the new papal policy.
Get use to it.
The Pope uses the metaphor of a Customs Duty desk when you enter a country. In a sense a church is like another country from the world surrounding because its where heaven meets earth in the eucharist and the people of, the citizens of God are gathered. He says don't set up a Customs Duty desk with a Customs officer at the front door of the church. Don't create an artificial liege system there with tests for entry. Suffer the little children come to me.
There is none. That was the Pope's message. There are people who wish to control the faith rather than facilitate it.
There are people who want to create an additional Sacrament in addition to the seventh of church custom (not scripturally sound or rooted) but just embedded with the bigotries and prejudice of church practices as they want to practice them. I would add (the paranoias and litigation risk managements)
A single mother goes to a church secretary and wants to baptize her child. The secretary acts all haughty and shuns the mother because she is an unwed sinner. The Pope blasts the proverbial church secretary here and says basically- you prefer she send the child back to its maker? This is one example he offers of church people going well outside their mission- WHAT ARE YOU PEOPLE DOING?
He says there are Seven Sacraments- when you do this you fabricate an eighth. Its insane. And harmful. Stop it.
The church doors should always be open - they should be open for EVERYONE to meet Jesus, to pray, to adore the eucharist.
You will find an open door there- it's the verse of a song. Its also the new papal policy.
Get use to it.
The Pope uses the metaphor of a Customs Duty desk when you enter a country. In a sense a church is like another country from the world surrounding because its where heaven meets earth in the eucharist and the people of, the citizens of God are gathered. He says don't set up a Customs Duty desk with a Customs officer at the front door of the church. Don't create an artificial liege system there with tests for entry. Suffer the little children come to me.
zele? un peu peut-etre?
Une Eglise avec les “portes ouvertes”, pas “une douane” où celui qui cherche Jésus est éloigné parce qu’il a commis quelque erreur. « Tenir éloignées les personnes, ce n’est pas du zèle, et les contrôleurs de la foi ne font pas plaisir à Jésus, » qui veut son Eglise ouverte à tous ceux qui cherchent de l’amour. Voilà ce que le Pape a expliqué samedi matin lors de la messe en la chapelle de la Maison Sainte Marthe au Vatican, en présence d’un groupe de prêtres. Et dans son homélie, le Pape a aussi évoqué le Concile Vatican II et ce qu’ìl affirme au sujet de « la foi du peuple de Dieu » et la fois des « gens simples ».
Le Pape François nous exhortait à ne pas éloigner de l’Eglise les personnes à la “foi plus simple”. Et il rappelait à ce propos l’épisode de l’Evangile où Jésus réprimande les disciples parce qu’il veulent éloigner les enfants qu’on lui amène. « Jésus les embrassait, les touchait, tous. Mais il se fatiguait beaucoup et les disciples voulaient l’empêcher », expliquait le Pape semblant parler un peu de lui-même en réalité et des hommes du service de sécurité du Vatican qui ont peur de la pression des gens qui veulent s’approcher de lui lors des audiences. « Jésus, rappelle en effet le Pape dans l’homélie de la messe de samedi matin, se mettait en colère et parfois disait : « Laissez-les venir à moi, ne les empêchez pas . Car le Royaume des Cieux appartient à celui qui est comme eux ».
Pourquoi instituer un huitième sacrement, celui de la "douane pastorale"?
Le Pape a alors pris deux exemples de la vie quotidienne, notamment « l’histoire de ce sacristain qui face à un couple de fiancés qui demandent d’être accompagnés au mariage leur demande aussitôt tous les certificats et leur communique le tarif des messes. Et puis cette fille mère qui demande le baptême pour son fils et à qui on oppose le fait qu’elle n’est pas mariée, alors qu’elle a eu le courage de porter à terme sa grossesse. » ! « Qu’ont-ils trouvé ? Porte close, a poursuivi le Pape, et « loin d’être du zèle, cela éloigne du Seigneur, cela n’ouvre pas les portes. Et ainsi, lorsque nous sommes sur ce chemin, dans cette attitude, nous ne faisons pas du bien aux personnes, au peuple de Dieu. Jésus a institué 7 sacrements, et nous par cette attitude nous en instituons un huitième : le sacrement de la douane pastorale ! »
“On se comporte trop souvent comme des contrôleurs de la foi, a poursuivi le Pape, alors que nous devrions être des facilitateurs de la foi des gens. C’est une vieille tentation, celle de nous approprier un peu du Seigneur », lançait le Pape. « Les enfants qui veulent aller vers Jésus, a-t-il commenté, expriment la « foi du peuple de Dieu, c’est une foi simple, c’est une fois peut-être sans beaucoup de théologie, mais avec une théologie à l’intérieur qui ne se trompe pas, parce qu’il y a l’Esprit Saint ». Le Pape François a alors cité la constitution Lumen Gentium qui affirme que « le peuple saint de Dieu ne peut se tromper en croyant », et pour expliquer sa pensée le Pape ajoutait : « Si tu veux savoir qui est Marie va trouver un théologien et il t’expliquera bien qui est Marie ». « Mais si tu veux savoir comment on aime Marie, tourne-toi vers le peuple de Dieu qui te l’enseignera beaucoup mieux ».
Le Pape François nous exhortait à ne pas éloigner de l’Eglise les personnes à la “foi plus simple”. Et il rappelait à ce propos l’épisode de l’Evangile où Jésus réprimande les disciples parce qu’il veulent éloigner les enfants qu’on lui amène. « Jésus les embrassait, les touchait, tous. Mais il se fatiguait beaucoup et les disciples voulaient l’empêcher », expliquait le Pape semblant parler un peu de lui-même en réalité et des hommes du service de sécurité du Vatican qui ont peur de la pression des gens qui veulent s’approcher de lui lors des audiences. « Jésus, rappelle en effet le Pape dans l’homélie de la messe de samedi matin, se mettait en colère et parfois disait : « Laissez-les venir à moi, ne les empêchez pas . Car le Royaume des Cieux appartient à celui qui est comme eux ».
Pourquoi instituer un huitième sacrement, celui de la "douane pastorale"?
Le Pape a alors pris deux exemples de la vie quotidienne, notamment « l’histoire de ce sacristain qui face à un couple de fiancés qui demandent d’être accompagnés au mariage leur demande aussitôt tous les certificats et leur communique le tarif des messes. Et puis cette fille mère qui demande le baptême pour son fils et à qui on oppose le fait qu’elle n’est pas mariée, alors qu’elle a eu le courage de porter à terme sa grossesse. » ! « Qu’ont-ils trouvé ? Porte close, a poursuivi le Pape, et « loin d’être du zèle, cela éloigne du Seigneur, cela n’ouvre pas les portes. Et ainsi, lorsque nous sommes sur ce chemin, dans cette attitude, nous ne faisons pas du bien aux personnes, au peuple de Dieu. Jésus a institué 7 sacrements, et nous par cette attitude nous en instituons un huitième : le sacrement de la douane pastorale ! »
“On se comporte trop souvent comme des contrôleurs de la foi, a poursuivi le Pape, alors que nous devrions être des facilitateurs de la foi des gens. C’est une vieille tentation, celle de nous approprier un peu du Seigneur », lançait le Pape. « Les enfants qui veulent aller vers Jésus, a-t-il commenté, expriment la « foi du peuple de Dieu, c’est une foi simple, c’est une fois peut-être sans beaucoup de théologie, mais avec une théologie à l’intérieur qui ne se trompe pas, parce qu’il y a l’Esprit Saint ». Le Pape François a alors cité la constitution Lumen Gentium qui affirme que « le peuple saint de Dieu ne peut se tromper en croyant », et pour expliquer sa pensée le Pape ajoutait : « Si tu veux savoir qui est Marie va trouver un théologien et il t’expliquera bien qui est Marie ». « Mais si tu veux savoir comment on aime Marie, tourne-toi vers le peuple de Dieu qui te l’enseignera beaucoup mieux ».
Friday, May 24, 2013
Give Us This Day Our Daily Bread
On Earth as it is In Heaven-
This helps a Protestant understand the spiritual meaning and significance of the Eucharist- what does it mean. Where does it come from. This will blow your mind. Scott Hahn was a Presbyterian Minister who didn't have much trek with Catholicism until he found out something you should know:
This helps a Protestant understand the spiritual meaning and significance of the Eucharist- what does it mean. Where does it come from. This will blow your mind. Scott Hahn was a Presbyterian Minister who didn't have much trek with Catholicism until he found out something you should know:
Thursday, May 23, 2013
Maria Maria
Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
thanks to Maria Shriver for this great interview highlighting a really serious important issue in our Military.GUANTANAMO
SHUT IT DOWN NOW.
Talk is cheap and there have been a lot of speeches. The people in Guantanamo without
a trial, in some cases without proper charges, those who were just guilty of being in the wrong place
at the wrong time with Bush's bounties on their heads, victims of Texas Oil exploitative war in Afghanistan, who are unjustly imprisoned against basic humanitarian and constitutional principles everywhere detained unlawfully, unjustly should be released and the prison shut down and burned to the ground immediately.
Every day it is open is a national security risk because it incites hatred against us everywhere.
It is a symbol of America betraying itself, its promises, its Freedom rationale for war, its Constitution.
You saw a crazed jihadist assault by a madman yesterday beheading someone with a meat cleaver machete on the streets of London yesterday. If it can happen in London it can happen here.
Just Shut it Down. There is no excuse for it.
Talk is cheap and there have been a lot of speeches. The people in Guantanamo without
a trial, in some cases without proper charges, those who were just guilty of being in the wrong place
at the wrong time with Bush's bounties on their heads, victims of Texas Oil exploitative war in Afghanistan, who are unjustly imprisoned against basic humanitarian and constitutional principles everywhere detained unlawfully, unjustly should be released and the prison shut down and burned to the ground immediately.
Every day it is open is a national security risk because it incites hatred against us everywhere.
It is a symbol of America betraying itself, its promises, its Freedom rationale for war, its Constitution.
You saw a crazed jihadist assault by a madman yesterday beheading someone with a meat cleaver machete on the streets of London yesterday. If it can happen in London it can happen here.
Just Shut it Down. There is no excuse for it.
Wednesday, May 22, 2013
Adoption
Strong Women Make Strong Families
Adoption is certainly preferable to abortion, we can all agree. But it takes sensible social policy to encourage it over other options because abortion is too easy and perhaps too legal everywhere. Ultimately it is always a choice of the mother whether she maintains herself in health during a pregnancy and protects her unborn until a successful delivery. Whether men like it or not women are in control of their bodies and insofar as prior to fetal viability at least they are in control of fetal health and viability as well. There is currently pending a case in the Supreme Court in the US in which an adoption has come under fire because of the competing interests of parental rights coupled with the competing interest of Native American rights as codified in a statute seeking to protect native american indian tribes from pilfering agencies who would seek to steal infants from their native american parents to give to adoption parents. It is a well intended statute to protect integrity of native american communities but its limits and purpose are tested in this case.
The case has stirred emotions all around in a scenario where apparently a rather deadbeat unwed inseminator who chose not to be called Dad initially on what could be understood as a troubled or doomed screwed up relationship (literally) gave up parental rights with a disparaging text message only to find out that his old girlfriend (or shagmate depeneding) wanted to give the baby girl up for adoption to a loving couple several states away. She wanted the child better cared for than the father was then capable of and she was possible of.
The unwed young mother thought that the child would be better off with two sets of parents who could well tend to the child while the birth father was totally absent from the scene until he learned of the adoption. It was an 'open' adoption meaning the child would know of her birth mother's identity and eventually if it wanted could establish a relationship of some kind later.
What does this have to do with native american rights? The father apparently claims to be a member of the Cherokee tribe making the child in some part Cherokee Native. He also is an Iraq war veteran who claims through his attorney(s) that he was duped into giving up rights because notice of the adoption was only served days before his deployment to Iraq more or less.
Abandonment is a factual issue and the courts look or should to things like involvement at the birth, involvement with the pregnant mother before or after the birth and apparently court in the adoption state did. After two years of being placed with the adoptive parents the baby was determined eventually through a series of appeals to belong to his birth father. Everyone was singing the song 'Cherokee People' until someone said, Hang on a Minute!
Normally there should be great deference given to an actual birthfather if he wants to raise his child. There might well be good reasons why he wanted nothing to do with the mother-he might not be totally
sure at first the child was his, he might think she was horrible to him, he might have had a total rupture of relationship with her for reasons no one knows for sure having to do with both their meanness or infidelities. One can forgive perhaps his negligence, one can also understand why she would fight any later attempt for the father to get full custody and invalidate an adoption if there was a war going on.
But there is one serious consideration that should give Scalia any pause from his usual deference to what a man wants to do with his household.
Adoptions can only happen if women CHOOSE to have children; If they CHOOSE to maintain a healthy pregnancy even when the man abandons them and all hell breaks loose in their romantic lives. Women, if they are to CHOOSE their children over their desires, and CHOOSE to bring a life into the world, have to have the confidence that they have the right to decide how the child is raised if they are abandoned. That includes their right to choose how the child should be tended to and with whom.
I would no more take the right of a natural mother away to choose where the child should be placed than I would tell her she cannot fire a bad babysitter. This is a mother's right. And it is a mother's right regardless of the ethnic identity of the father- certainly of a deadbeat absent father who took no interest in the health or welfare of the child until much after its birth.
And you may in whole or part quote me on that.
Adoption is certainly preferable to abortion, we can all agree. But it takes sensible social policy to encourage it over other options because abortion is too easy and perhaps too legal everywhere. Ultimately it is always a choice of the mother whether she maintains herself in health during a pregnancy and protects her unborn until a successful delivery. Whether men like it or not women are in control of their bodies and insofar as prior to fetal viability at least they are in control of fetal health and viability as well. There is currently pending a case in the Supreme Court in the US in which an adoption has come under fire because of the competing interests of parental rights coupled with the competing interest of Native American rights as codified in a statute seeking to protect native american indian tribes from pilfering agencies who would seek to steal infants from their native american parents to give to adoption parents. It is a well intended statute to protect integrity of native american communities but its limits and purpose are tested in this case.
The case has stirred emotions all around in a scenario where apparently a rather deadbeat unwed inseminator who chose not to be called Dad initially on what could be understood as a troubled or doomed screwed up relationship (literally) gave up parental rights with a disparaging text message only to find out that his old girlfriend (or shagmate depeneding) wanted to give the baby girl up for adoption to a loving couple several states away. She wanted the child better cared for than the father was then capable of and she was possible of.
The unwed young mother thought that the child would be better off with two sets of parents who could well tend to the child while the birth father was totally absent from the scene until he learned of the adoption. It was an 'open' adoption meaning the child would know of her birth mother's identity and eventually if it wanted could establish a relationship of some kind later.
What does this have to do with native american rights? The father apparently claims to be a member of the Cherokee tribe making the child in some part Cherokee Native. He also is an Iraq war veteran who claims through his attorney(s) that he was duped into giving up rights because notice of the adoption was only served days before his deployment to Iraq more or less.
Abandonment is a factual issue and the courts look or should to things like involvement at the birth, involvement with the pregnant mother before or after the birth and apparently court in the adoption state did. After two years of being placed with the adoptive parents the baby was determined eventually through a series of appeals to belong to his birth father. Everyone was singing the song 'Cherokee People' until someone said, Hang on a Minute!
Normally there should be great deference given to an actual birthfather if he wants to raise his child. There might well be good reasons why he wanted nothing to do with the mother-he might not be totally
sure at first the child was his, he might think she was horrible to him, he might have had a total rupture of relationship with her for reasons no one knows for sure having to do with both their meanness or infidelities. One can forgive perhaps his negligence, one can also understand why she would fight any later attempt for the father to get full custody and invalidate an adoption if there was a war going on.
But there is one serious consideration that should give Scalia any pause from his usual deference to what a man wants to do with his household.
Adoptions can only happen if women CHOOSE to have children; If they CHOOSE to maintain a healthy pregnancy even when the man abandons them and all hell breaks loose in their romantic lives. Women, if they are to CHOOSE their children over their desires, and CHOOSE to bring a life into the world, have to have the confidence that they have the right to decide how the child is raised if they are abandoned. That includes their right to choose how the child should be tended to and with whom.
I would no more take the right of a natural mother away to choose where the child should be placed than I would tell her she cannot fire a bad babysitter. This is a mother's right. And it is a mother's right regardless of the ethnic identity of the father- certainly of a deadbeat absent father who took no interest in the health or welfare of the child until much after its birth.
And you may in whole or part quote me on that.
Tuesday, May 21, 2013
Spaketh the Queen
The Queen's message to President Obama:
"I was deeply saddened to hear of the loss of life and devastation caused by yesterday’s tornado in Oklahoma. Prince Philip joins me in offering our heartfelt condolences to the victims and their families at this difficult time. Our deepest sympathies go out to all those whose lives have been affected, as well as the American people."
Elizabeth R
Saturday, May 18, 2013
The Popes WISE Words-
POPE FRANCIS' HOMILY
The Christian must overcome the temptation to "interfere in the lives of others," was the exhortation of Pope Francis at Mass this morning at the Casa Santa Marta. The Pope also stressed that talk and envy do so much harm to the Christian community.
"What is it to you?" Pope Francis begin his homily referring to a question Jesus posed to Peter when he had meddled in the life of the disciple John, "whom Jesus loved." Peter, the Pope pointed out, had "a dialogue of love" with the Lord, but then the dialogue "is diverted to another track," and he also suffers from a temptation: "to interfere in the lives of others." How do you say "vulgar," said the Pope, Peter becomes "nosy". Focus is therefore on two modes of this mix in the lives of others. First, the "comparison", "to compare oneself with others." When there is this comparison, Pope Francis said, "we end up in bitterness and even envy, but envy rusts the Christian community, "it brings much hurt," the "devil wants that." The second mode of this temptation, he added, is gossip. It begins "in an educated way," but then we end up “feeling bad”.
"We all chat in Church! As Christians we chat! The chatter is hurtful? We hurt one another. It is as if we want to put each other down.: instead of growing one makes the other feel small while I feel great. That will not do! It seems nice to chat ... I do not know why, but it looks nice. Like sweet of honey, right? You take one and then another, and another, and another, and in the end you have a stomach ache. And why ? The chatter is like that eh? It is 'sweet at first and it ruins you, it ruins your soul! Rumours are destructive in the Church, they are destructive ... It’s 'a little' like the spirit of Cain who killed his brother, his tongue; it kills his brother! "
On this road, the Holy Father said, "we become Christians of good manners and bad habits." But how do we do this ? Normally, Pope Francis noted, "we do three things":
"We supply misinformation: we tell only half that suits us and not the other half, the other half we do not say because it is not convenient for us. You smile at that ... Is that true or not? Did you see that thing? It goes on. The second is defamation: When a person truly has a flaw, it is big, they tell it, 'like a journalist' ... And the character of this person is ruined. And the third is the slander of saying things that are not true. It is like killing ones brother! All three - disinformation, defamation and slander - are sins! This is sin! It is to slap Jesus in the person of his children, his brothers. "
That is why Jesus does with us what he did with Peter when he says: "What is it to you? Follow me, "The Lord in this instance" points the way ":
"'This kind of talk will not do you any good, because it will just bring to the Church a spirit of destruction. Follow me! '. These are the beautiful words of Jesus, it is so clear, that he has so much love for us. As if to say: 'Don’t have fantasies, believing that salvation is in the comparisons with others or in gossip. Salvation is to go behind me '. Following Jesus! Today we ask the Lord Jesus to give us this grace not to ever get involved in the lives of others, not to become Christians of good manners and bad habits, it is to follow Jesus, to walk behind Jesus on his way. And this is enough. "
During his homily, Pope Francis also recalled an episode from the life of St. Therese who wondered why Jesus gave so much to one and not to another. The older sister then took a thimble and a glass and filled them with water and then asked Therese which of the two was more full. "But both are full," said the future saint. Jesus, the Pope said, does this with us", "he does not care if you're big, you're or small." What interests him is "if you are filled with the love of Jesus."
THANK YOU VATICAN NEWS :-)
Thursday, May 16, 2013
NO ONE
IS PERFECT
There is a Nun who was once a hollywood darling starlet who palled around with a young Elvis. She became a Benedictine Nun and her life became a movie.
Once while she was with Elvis someone shouted out to him "You are the King" to which he replied "Don't call me King, there is but one King, the Lord Jesus Christ." This impressed her apparently. As popular as Elvis is or was, as popular or important as anyone is or was, they, and we are just mortal. And mortal means Not Perfect. Not Hardly.
Even real Kings, not pretend Hollywood ones are not perfect. Youtube will be the curse of the modern British monarchy as people now are starting to tilt the kingship in the favor of Diana's progeny (as it rightfully belongs) as opposed to anything Camilla the Hun might be conniving, as she is determined apparently to be Queen. The story of that Monarchy through the centuries is
filled with palace intrigue and not a little bloody murder apparently--something King Henry VIII is more known for than anything else he did, doing away with multiple wives' heads.
It is widely rumored and supported with YouTube videos of tattle tales that Prince Charles of Wales (once upon a time the most eligible bachelor in the western world, and a sex symbol outrivaling Elvis, who could cut a rug dancing till dawn) was having an affair with two women who detested each other before marrying Diana and only one of them carried on after the marriage as his mistress who later became his wife-the now Duchess of Cornwall-Camilla de Ville as she is called by those cherishing the memory of Diana the Dead. The wife and the other mistress are mysteriously well before their time dead with convenient explanations and 'accidents' to blame. It is also widely rumored that in between all that tomfoolery with jealous mistresses he was also buggering certain of the Palace staff. It is anathema to even suggest it. The Sun and other tabloid mayhem thrive on such anathemas. Because there is a burning drive to establish that these people are just mortals like the rest of us.
No one is Perfect. Not even Kings. Not even wannabe Kings, not even first in line to the royal throne of what was once the greatest Empire in the Western World with holdings that stretched all the way to the Middle East and modern day Israel.
It was once thought that Kings ruled by Divine Right and some in France at least took that to mean because Mary Magdalene actually had children with Jesus and the progeny became French Merovingian Kings spawning royal households across Europe. This myth was heavily debunked by the Papal royalists who deemed there to be only one earthly King as representative of Jesus- the Pope because Jesus was single and gave the keys to the kingdom to one guy (like he didn't know how to make several sets). Those kingdoms clashed time and again. The legitimacy, illegitimacy distinction in British monarchy seems all arbitrary myth when one considers that William the Conqueror in 1066 was believed in France to be a bastard son (illegitimate) of a nobleman which is why they call him Guiomme Le Batard (Billy the Bastard). No one since in England can really claim to be 'legitimate' descended from that Norman invasion, and there have been other breaks in what would be considered a legitimate line from French Kings in England, to the Plantagenets, Tudors and Windsors.
The history is a fascinating story of who gets to call themselves Royal or Aristocratic in British terms with warring cousins and murderous subterfuges. The current still living Prince Phillip, the Queen's husband was once thought too common an aristocrat to marry into the Royal household because he was born a German (called Charlie Kraut by some) of the noble clsss that was once of the line of King of Greece but exhiled during a Greek Civil War which sent him packing to live with British uncle Mountbatten and being schooled in an English boarding school. He apparently is called "Prince Consort" and not good enough in blueish blood to be King, but would be grandfather or father to the next King.
But Jesus tells us that there is only one right true Kingdom - "My Kingdom is not of this earth" said Jesus- The Kingdom of God is not found on a map. The true King, and the only one who is perfect, is Jesus the Lord. He tells us who is eligible for citizenship in his Kingdom. 1 Corinthians 6:9. The Righteous, the Just, those who Keep his Commandments, those who call upon the name of the true Lord. And who does Jesus say is in HIS Royal Family? Those who do HIS will. Those who follow HIS commandments. Those who follow HIS path of Righteousness, Those who DO what he says, not just talk about it.
What he says to do is radical. It requires a radical obedience. Not blind loyalty to a perishable crown with defects, subterfuges, hidden murders and adulteries.
What Jesus says to do to inherit HIS Kingdom is radical obedience to a radical morality- not what the common masses think is ok- but a radical purity -of heart, and body.
Elvis was Right. There is but One True King. The Lord Jesus Christ.
Wednesday, May 15, 2013
Tuesday, May 14, 2013
american hollocaust?
must see tv---
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymSMnvxQX-w&list=PLh-sbuRmpYvpIoAOuz6Du07qXY0UjfL8Q
click here---http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymSMnvxQX-w&list=PLh-sbuRmpYvpIoAOuz6Du07qXY0UjfL8Q
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymSMnvxQX-w&list=PLh-sbuRmpYvpIoAOuz6Du07qXY0UjfL8Q
click here---http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymSMnvxQX-w&list=PLh-sbuRmpYvpIoAOuz6Du07qXY0UjfL8Q
THE DARK SIDE OF THE MOON
Dear Good Peace Loving Fellow Americans
Please do yourself a favor and research CIA Black Ops, the Black Budget, Psy Ops (Psychological Operations) and False Flag attacks.
Then go on youtube and research how the CIA has infiltrated the media to plant effectively stories and essentially buy and use media for its own story planting/fabricating purposes.
We are being set up.
Please go to the website of Infowars.com
The Boston Marathon- now research on Youtube the videos and explanations of people who belive that this was a staged scene. then look at the terror that the government and news media together inflicted on the people of Boston when they put the entire city on lockdown and went door to door with
black riot geared storm troopers in conjunction with local police. Look how the media hyped it--
That was a drill.
Then realize what is really happening. What they really want to do. And who they are getting support from.
There are thug sadists running the shadow government. They have a population control plot and plan.
Do not let the Justice Department be party to set up indictments.
I would fire the FBI and rehire all new ones. Right from the top down, the Director down.
If you are any of the people involved in this i urge you to practice civil disobedience and not follow up with it. Report it instead.
Do not follow up with violating the Constitution with illegal search and seizures and unlawful arrests of anyone. Do not terrorize American people on American soil.
Remember what you read here. Think in advance what you would do if told to shoot someone. We are not nazis. if told/ordered to shoot someone, i think i would rather shoot the person giving the orders in an illegal war by americans against americans.
Do not let anyone take you away for your safety.
They will try an American style Hollocaust- but it cannot happen here if we do not let it.
Some high religious leaders know what is happening.
Monday, May 13, 2013
men wear yamultas
and Women Preach.
It was significant that the Pope playfully put his Yamulka (there is a latin term for the ones priests wear)- on a young girl. There is a serious discussion regarding whether women should become Deacons and they are being championed by Cardinals in Germany. Signs and signals are important and it is a good brave one.
But its not necessary to turn women into men clerics to allow them to teach, preach or baptize. You don't have to dress women up like men clerics to make them clerical or invest them with functions that the Holy Spirit has gifted them as having already.
When women started being lawyers in white shoe firms the men thought they should look like them so they wore male looking suits with skirts and shirts that had built in bow tieable ties. Then the wardrobe started looking decided more feminine- Chanel even. Because there is nothing about 'lawyer' that is intrinsically male either. Its just convention- tradition. Something old men judges are use to seeing.
In England Judges wear white curly long haired wigs signifying I suppose gray haired wisdom. They are a mandatory part of the uniform with the black robes. There is nothing distinctively male or female
about judging- no need to dress like Eddie Izzard. Its just convention.
What can a woman Deacon look like? She can look like herself. If she is outside preaching she can preach with an Easter Bonnet on for all anyone should care. If she is inside she can wear her hair in a french twist or sport a bandana for all anyone should care. Its about the message not the head covering.
If one must cover their heads in church, then use your hair. Or if you prefer being more formal,
use a black lace veil or a Jackie O pillbox hat. No one cares. The point is that what is on your head
doesn't affect what comes out of your mouth. And wearing a yamulka or not isn't what makes you smart or holy.
It was significant that the Pope playfully put his Yamulka (there is a latin term for the ones priests wear)- on a young girl. There is a serious discussion regarding whether women should become Deacons and they are being championed by Cardinals in Germany. Signs and signals are important and it is a good brave one.
But its not necessary to turn women into men clerics to allow them to teach, preach or baptize. You don't have to dress women up like men clerics to make them clerical or invest them with functions that the Holy Spirit has gifted them as having already.
When women started being lawyers in white shoe firms the men thought they should look like them so they wore male looking suits with skirts and shirts that had built in bow tieable ties. Then the wardrobe started looking decided more feminine- Chanel even. Because there is nothing about 'lawyer' that is intrinsically male either. Its just convention- tradition. Something old men judges are use to seeing.
In England Judges wear white curly long haired wigs signifying I suppose gray haired wisdom. They are a mandatory part of the uniform with the black robes. There is nothing distinctively male or female
about judging- no need to dress like Eddie Izzard. Its just convention.
What can a woman Deacon look like? She can look like herself. If she is outside preaching she can preach with an Easter Bonnet on for all anyone should care. If she is inside she can wear her hair in a french twist or sport a bandana for all anyone should care. Its about the message not the head covering.
If one must cover their heads in church, then use your hair. Or if you prefer being more formal,
use a black lace veil or a Jackie O pillbox hat. No one cares. The point is that what is on your head
doesn't affect what comes out of your mouth. And wearing a yamulka or not isn't what makes you smart or holy.
Sunday, May 12, 2013
Said Princess Diana to the BBC
I believe, what is most important to me when discussing the monarchy, is that the people don't become indifferent and apathetic. It is a problem. My children must change the monarchy one day.
What do you do to prepare them for this?
I visit the homeless and people who are dying from AIDS with the children. I take them overall with me. I give them knowledge and experience, as knowledge is power. I would like them to be understanding. So they can learn about desperation, hope and dreams.
What type of monarchy do you expect?
One that cared for a close contact to the population.
http://www.biography.com/people/princess-diana-9273782
What do you do to prepare them for this?
I visit the homeless and people who are dying from AIDS with the children. I take them overall with me. I give them knowledge and experience, as knowledge is power. I would like them to be understanding. So they can learn about desperation, hope and dreams.
What type of monarchy do you expect?
One that cared for a close contact to the population.
http://www.biography.com/people/princess-diana-9273782
Repeat after me
Not the Queen, Not the Queen
DEFINATELY
not the Queen
The Queen should have much nicer underoos. p.s. while posing starkers for your husband's painting hobby at your mother-in-laws estate try to make sure your mother in law's butler is not hiding in the bushes with his cell phone camera.
DEFINATELY
not the Queen
The Queen should have much nicer underoos. p.s. while posing starkers for your husband's painting hobby at your mother-in-laws estate try to make sure your mother in law's butler is not hiding in the bushes with his cell phone camera.
Saturday, May 11, 2013
Wednesday, May 08, 2013
I Love Jesuits
I want to Print Up T-shirts
I Love Jesuits. If you haven't 'friended' Fr Martin yet, do it- he has the greatest posts.
Jesuits are Jesus' seal team. They are by lightyears the brightest guys in the room. I and many like me would never even be Catholics without them- because the other hierarchy can be at times sadistic and ignorant, justifying their meanness in the name of moral piety, when they completely misunderstand basic public policy. The diocesese hierarchy has always been a few degrees dimmer than the Jesuits.
Take Abortion for instance. The religious right has always used it as a political football and bright line. Republicans are the good guys and democrats the 'baby killers' because of abortion politics.
Yet under Democratic Administrations abortion statistics always decrease because they are much more strategic and clever about reducing unwanted pregnancy in the first place and incentivizing women, whom they tend to respect much more, into wanting to carry children to term.
Abortion statistics also go down under Democratic priorities, principles and regimes because they understand the connection between poverty and abortion, education and abortion and women's rights and abortion and make laws and policies that favor bringing life into the world, whereas Republicans
just want to demonize women and criminalize them, as if they got pregnant by themselves.
Generally speaking Cardinals want to shout moral proclamations whereas Democratic politicians
tend to want to find solutions. Cardinals are in that regard not more pious, just dumber. To add insult to the injury that they cause by polarizing rather than letting facts inform the discussion they punish dissent rudely.
Jesuits are smart. They are educators. They run universities. They understand the nuances of policy
and factors influencing it.
It is small minded ignorant, rude and incorrect that one must be a Republican to be a good Christian or a good Catholic. And to punish dissent is more than ignorant- it is saddistic. One can be a great theologian and a lousy Christian and there are a few Cardinals in that boat.
Saint John of the Cross said 'the road to hell is paved with the skulls of Bishops' and now i see why.
I Love Jesuits. If you haven't 'friended' Fr Martin yet, do it- he has the greatest posts.
Jesuits are Jesus' seal team. They are by lightyears the brightest guys in the room. I and many like me would never even be Catholics without them- because the other hierarchy can be at times sadistic and ignorant, justifying their meanness in the name of moral piety, when they completely misunderstand basic public policy. The diocesese hierarchy has always been a few degrees dimmer than the Jesuits.
Take Abortion for instance. The religious right has always used it as a political football and bright line. Republicans are the good guys and democrats the 'baby killers' because of abortion politics.
Yet under Democratic Administrations abortion statistics always decrease because they are much more strategic and clever about reducing unwanted pregnancy in the first place and incentivizing women, whom they tend to respect much more, into wanting to carry children to term.
Abortion statistics also go down under Democratic priorities, principles and regimes because they understand the connection between poverty and abortion, education and abortion and women's rights and abortion and make laws and policies that favor bringing life into the world, whereas Republicans
just want to demonize women and criminalize them, as if they got pregnant by themselves.
Generally speaking Cardinals want to shout moral proclamations whereas Democratic politicians
tend to want to find solutions. Cardinals are in that regard not more pious, just dumber. To add insult to the injury that they cause by polarizing rather than letting facts inform the discussion they punish dissent rudely.
Jesuits are smart. They are educators. They run universities. They understand the nuances of policy
and factors influencing it.
It is small minded ignorant, rude and incorrect that one must be a Republican to be a good Christian or a good Catholic. And to punish dissent is more than ignorant- it is saddistic. One can be a great theologian and a lousy Christian and there are a few Cardinals in that boat.
Saint John of the Cross said 'the road to hell is paved with the skulls of Bishops' and now i see why.
Tuesday, May 07, 2013
CANCERS
FEED OFF LIFE TO CREATE DISEASE AND DEATH
Cancers create disease by feeding off healthy cells and turning them malignant.
The Saint Luke's Institute in Silver Spring, Montgomery County, Maryland within the Archdiocese of Washington, DC, which is going global is a multi-million dollar enterprise
that feeds off trying to 'cure' priests struggling with their sexuality to 'cure' them, or chemically castrate them for service
by giving them medication that chemically turns them impotent, to deal with their sexuality by killing it off essentially rendering them sexless unproblematic tools of the Cardinal. The Saint Luke's Institute had a lofty sounding mission to cure priests, and other religious to make them fit for service without their healthy sexuality getting in the way. Donald Wuerl the Cardinal Archbishop of Washington gets paid and promoted to run a smooth operation- without messy distractions like priests falling in love or buggering boys. There is no worse place to be a priest for any healthy male who wants to preserve his sexuality for 'just in case' than the Archdiocese of Washington, DC. It turns nice men into monsters. I dont care what it does to the pedopriests.
In the tale of what could be more ironic than the French Minister of Finance charged with routing out tax cheats with undeclared Swiss accounts resigning because he is a tax cheat with an undeclared Swiss Account, the head of the Saint Luke's Institute in Washington, DC has just been 'resigned' for being reported to the authorities for his 'inappropriate' sexual conduct presumably with a minor in his home diocese. Why should this shock the nation?
First, you don't treat an erection by chopping off a penis chemically, which is how Saint Luke's apparently deals with wayward, aka, heterosexual priests- leaving emotional devastation waters for any woman involved to drown in. Second, you don't put in charge of "curing' priests a secret PedoPriest- like you didn't know why they wanted to ship him to Washington. Third, you should look at the symptoms to cure the underlying condition not 'treat' the symptoms. If you could cure breast cancer by
eating mushrooms give people mushrooms don't chop their breasts off. If you could cure the depressive angry malaise of the priesthood by letting people get married, stop chemically castrating people.
The 'cure' model and everything they do at the Saint Luke's Institute including the medications they prescribe should be audited by outside medical professionals and subject to outside medical standards.
A 'psychiatrist' should not be prescribing a prostate medication that sterilizes someone.
The entire Saint Luke's books and records should be examined outside Washington, The 'cure' rates should be evaluated and the strategies and methodologies should be put under medical review.
And Priests, for GODs SAKE should be allowed to be married to women. For God's Sake.
If Saint Luke's Institue were around in Jesus' time Zechariah would be chemically castrated with prostate medication and
Mary would be given psychotropic anti-hallucinogens.
The place is sicker than you realize. and its not for the greater glory of God.
Cancers create disease by feeding off healthy cells and turning them malignant.
The Saint Luke's Institute in Silver Spring, Montgomery County, Maryland within the Archdiocese of Washington, DC, which is going global is a multi-million dollar enterprise
that feeds off trying to 'cure' priests struggling with their sexuality to 'cure' them, or chemically castrate them for service
by giving them medication that chemically turns them impotent, to deal with their sexuality by killing it off essentially rendering them sexless unproblematic tools of the Cardinal. The Saint Luke's Institute had a lofty sounding mission to cure priests, and other religious to make them fit for service without their healthy sexuality getting in the way. Donald Wuerl the Cardinal Archbishop of Washington gets paid and promoted to run a smooth operation- without messy distractions like priests falling in love or buggering boys. There is no worse place to be a priest for any healthy male who wants to preserve his sexuality for 'just in case' than the Archdiocese of Washington, DC. It turns nice men into monsters. I dont care what it does to the pedopriests.
In the tale of what could be more ironic than the French Minister of Finance charged with routing out tax cheats with undeclared Swiss accounts resigning because he is a tax cheat with an undeclared Swiss Account, the head of the Saint Luke's Institute in Washington, DC has just been 'resigned' for being reported to the authorities for his 'inappropriate' sexual conduct presumably with a minor in his home diocese. Why should this shock the nation?
First, you don't treat an erection by chopping off a penis chemically, which is how Saint Luke's apparently deals with wayward, aka, heterosexual priests- leaving emotional devastation waters for any woman involved to drown in. Second, you don't put in charge of "curing' priests a secret PedoPriest- like you didn't know why they wanted to ship him to Washington. Third, you should look at the symptoms to cure the underlying condition not 'treat' the symptoms. If you could cure breast cancer by
eating mushrooms give people mushrooms don't chop their breasts off. If you could cure the depressive angry malaise of the priesthood by letting people get married, stop chemically castrating people.
The 'cure' model and everything they do at the Saint Luke's Institute including the medications they prescribe should be audited by outside medical professionals and subject to outside medical standards.
A 'psychiatrist' should not be prescribing a prostate medication that sterilizes someone.
The entire Saint Luke's books and records should be examined outside Washington, The 'cure' rates should be evaluated and the strategies and methodologies should be put under medical review.
And Priests, for GODs SAKE should be allowed to be married to women. For God's Sake.
If Saint Luke's Institue were around in Jesus' time Zechariah would be chemically castrated with prostate medication and
Mary would be given psychotropic anti-hallucinogens.
The place is sicker than you realize. and its not for the greater glory of God.
What's a Deacon?
And Why not Women Deacons?
There are things called Catechists, and other educators, and church secretaries and even business managers who are women, so what's the big deal about Women Deacons?
Clearly there were women 'deacons' in the bible. What was a Deacon? Saint Stephen was one for example. Those were the people who made sure that the right allotments went to feed the widows and tend to the basic material needs of the congregation. They might now be called the Aumonerie. or the Daily Distribution, or the Food and Friends or SOME or other places where daily or regularly they provide charitable support to people.
They might be now what Catholic Charities does in part. Parts of all those functions are what 'Deacon' means.
Deacon in the Catholic church is different than in the rest of the Protestant world. Deacons in the Protestant world are not typically schooled in Preaching or even necessarily in Teaching and Seminary is not a requirement. Deacons in the Catholic world can, and do fairly regularly at Saint Matthews Cathedral, preach from the pulpit.
They have some formation or seminary training. They are not scripturally illiterate. They are clerics. They wear clerical robes. They are on the payroll in some fashion.
In the Protestant world deacon means the man or woman at the door greeting you Sunday morning, they can sometimes have authority to review the books, distribute funds, chair committees, like the Stewardship committee and the like. They are not considered clerics in the majority of the Protestant world. Presbyterians don't consider them clerics. In some other denominations, where 'cleric' isn't necessarily just a 'minister' they may be, like Baptists. In the Protestant world a Deacon is not on the payroll, he or she typically gives large sums to support the church efforts-they function more like Parish Council does in that regard.
Fr. Tom Reese mentioned that because the Catholic Church has so many full time paid people who are doing all kinds of things on the payroll, he isn't a huge fan of sacramentalizing part-time people who
hold outside jobs.
But the point is really that they already have Deacons- and they are all men, so why can't women also do it? What scripturally says a woman can't give a Sermon or Baptize a child? When I was briefly a Dominican third order lay novitiate I was told women could baptize now anyway in a pinch absent
a priest when a child needed baptizing- say in the remotest places in Africa.
Deacon now has been sacramentalized. (Was Saint Stephen someone we would now call a cleric?) In the Catholic world a Deacon can be 'permanent' or 'transitional.'
Deacon means to some Priest-lite, or mini-Priest, or almost-Priest. But there is more to it. There are the ones who are married who hold outside jobs not in the church but the 'real' world and the transitional ones are on their way to the Priesthood and this is just training for them. The permanent deacons generally remain with a congregation because they live there with their families, and the transitional ones can be posted for terms of years and moved to other parishes in the Diocese.
Women should be able to be Catholic Deacons-why ?? Because there are some that would be awesomely gifted preachers. Gifts of the spirit come uniquely to different people. Different people have different gifts, some of prophesy, some of translating tongues, some of preaching, some of teaching, some of ......Note it doesn't say only men have gifts of the Spirit....
There are some people, some women, who are church 'workers' who are doing things that only people with adequate formation should be doing. A deacon is not a church secretary. No one would go to a church secretary for spiritual advice or guidance. That isn't to say that some people doing that job could not also be gifted spiritual guides but knowing excel spreadsheets and how to answer a phone is not the same skill set as spiritual guide or preacher. It is possible that some people already full time employed would like to become deacons and would be good ones-and if that opportunity is open to men it should also be open to women. At holy trinity there is a particularly gifted spiritual retreat person who is a woman, married I believe, who would be a prime candidate.
God has clearly gifted women to be preachers. One only need to look at how many brilliant competent ones there are in the Protestant world. If you put the discipline and knowledge of a catholic seminary training with someone gifted to preach, why on earth would the Catholic world want to cheat
its members by not allowing women to serve in them in that capacity?
I believe that the two obviously necessary key fundamental changes, you can call it post Vatican II reforms, that would make Catholicism the dynamic Evangelical fire Jesus intends it to be in this century are
1. women deacons and 2. optional diocesene priestly marriage.
Start that discussion in your Parish, feel free to make comments, and tell your Pastor what you think about that. Better yet, lets start a letter writing campaign to send love letters to Rome to tell Pope Francis what we think:-)
There are things called Catechists, and other educators, and church secretaries and even business managers who are women, so what's the big deal about Women Deacons?
Clearly there were women 'deacons' in the bible. What was a Deacon? Saint Stephen was one for example. Those were the people who made sure that the right allotments went to feed the widows and tend to the basic material needs of the congregation. They might now be called the Aumonerie. or the Daily Distribution, or the Food and Friends or SOME or other places where daily or regularly they provide charitable support to people.
They might be now what Catholic Charities does in part. Parts of all those functions are what 'Deacon' means.
Deacon in the Catholic church is different than in the rest of the Protestant world. Deacons in the Protestant world are not typically schooled in Preaching or even necessarily in Teaching and Seminary is not a requirement. Deacons in the Catholic world can, and do fairly regularly at Saint Matthews Cathedral, preach from the pulpit.
They have some formation or seminary training. They are not scripturally illiterate. They are clerics. They wear clerical robes. They are on the payroll in some fashion.
In the Protestant world deacon means the man or woman at the door greeting you Sunday morning, they can sometimes have authority to review the books, distribute funds, chair committees, like the Stewardship committee and the like. They are not considered clerics in the majority of the Protestant world. Presbyterians don't consider them clerics. In some other denominations, where 'cleric' isn't necessarily just a 'minister' they may be, like Baptists. In the Protestant world a Deacon is not on the payroll, he or she typically gives large sums to support the church efforts-they function more like Parish Council does in that regard.
Fr. Tom Reese mentioned that because the Catholic Church has so many full time paid people who are doing all kinds of things on the payroll, he isn't a huge fan of sacramentalizing part-time people who
hold outside jobs.
But the point is really that they already have Deacons- and they are all men, so why can't women also do it? What scripturally says a woman can't give a Sermon or Baptize a child? When I was briefly a Dominican third order lay novitiate I was told women could baptize now anyway in a pinch absent
a priest when a child needed baptizing- say in the remotest places in Africa.
Deacon now has been sacramentalized. (Was Saint Stephen someone we would now call a cleric?) In the Catholic world a Deacon can be 'permanent' or 'transitional.'
Deacon means to some Priest-lite, or mini-Priest, or almost-Priest. But there is more to it. There are the ones who are married who hold outside jobs not in the church but the 'real' world and the transitional ones are on their way to the Priesthood and this is just training for them. The permanent deacons generally remain with a congregation because they live there with their families, and the transitional ones can be posted for terms of years and moved to other parishes in the Diocese.
Women should be able to be Catholic Deacons-why ?? Because there are some that would be awesomely gifted preachers. Gifts of the spirit come uniquely to different people. Different people have different gifts, some of prophesy, some of translating tongues, some of preaching, some of teaching, some of ......Note it doesn't say only men have gifts of the Spirit....
There are some people, some women, who are church 'workers' who are doing things that only people with adequate formation should be doing. A deacon is not a church secretary. No one would go to a church secretary for spiritual advice or guidance. That isn't to say that some people doing that job could not also be gifted spiritual guides but knowing excel spreadsheets and how to answer a phone is not the same skill set as spiritual guide or preacher. It is possible that some people already full time employed would like to become deacons and would be good ones-and if that opportunity is open to men it should also be open to women. At holy trinity there is a particularly gifted spiritual retreat person who is a woman, married I believe, who would be a prime candidate.
God has clearly gifted women to be preachers. One only need to look at how many brilliant competent ones there are in the Protestant world. If you put the discipline and knowledge of a catholic seminary training with someone gifted to preach, why on earth would the Catholic world want to cheat
its members by not allowing women to serve in them in that capacity?
I believe that the two obviously necessary key fundamental changes, you can call it post Vatican II reforms, that would make Catholicism the dynamic Evangelical fire Jesus intends it to be in this century are
1. women deacons and 2. optional diocesene priestly marriage.
Start that discussion in your Parish, feel free to make comments, and tell your Pastor what you think about that. Better yet, lets start a letter writing campaign to send love letters to Rome to tell Pope Francis what we think:-)
Monday, May 06, 2013
The Surprise
of This Papacy
stated Fr. Tom Reese to a packed standing room only crowd at Holy Trinity may be the mandatory celibacy.
"I would rather have good Christians than bad Priests" said Fr. Reese quoting the Pope.
This Pope doesn't suffer well fools, or those priests trying to live double lives and compromised integrity and honesty by having secret, winky wink, 'housekeepers', 'house mothers' aka priest-whores, or girlfriends on the side that they romantically woo with dishonorable intentions. Traumatizing women, emotional serial adultery,
isn't part of the job description. Honorable means marriage. Out in the open, ring and all, so the 'community' can see what its about and bless it. Here is a hint that something is off the rails- if the widow woman who folds the programs and greets people at the door of the church starts yelling at people like its her house, something is romantically off the rails there--or the dame needs to check herself into rehab.
This Pope wants integrity and honesty. He wants priests to be decent men not spoiled adolescents.
This Pope talks a lot about living what you preach. If you preach love, be Love as God is Love.
It isn't love to demean women or disrespect them. Your little white collar isn't a license to be a jerk to anyone and should always reflect Jesus whose shoes you stand in. There is not one example anywhere in scripture of Jesus being rude to, insulting, disrespectful of or demeaning to women. He was exactly the opposite. If you are in your collar for any other reason than to be Jesus in the world you are a fraud, a phoney, a pretender and a hypocrite worse than a Pharisee.
According to Reese there is a difference between a vow of chastity and a promise of celibacy. Jesuits and orders take the former and diocesene priests take the later. Not sure why promises can be broken, but there would be a reason if a man fell in love with and wanted to marry a woman.
This Pope says if you get a woman pregnant and you are a Priest, you must leave.
Because the child deserves a father present.
There is no reason why Diocesene priests couldn't marry, unlike order priests living in community where the logistics would become unwieldy. Its a canon law, not found anywhere in scripture (Jewish rabbis all can marry) and married priests are in the Eastern Catholic church already and with those converts from Episcopalianism. Married Priests make sense for Diocesene priests. They make a world of sense in fact if you understand how to value women and what they would add to the mix.
stated Fr. Tom Reese to a packed standing room only crowd at Holy Trinity may be the mandatory celibacy.
"I would rather have good Christians than bad Priests" said Fr. Reese quoting the Pope.
This Pope doesn't suffer well fools, or those priests trying to live double lives and compromised integrity and honesty by having secret, winky wink, 'housekeepers', 'house mothers' aka priest-whores, or girlfriends on the side that they romantically woo with dishonorable intentions. Traumatizing women, emotional serial adultery,
isn't part of the job description. Honorable means marriage. Out in the open, ring and all, so the 'community' can see what its about and bless it. Here is a hint that something is off the rails- if the widow woman who folds the programs and greets people at the door of the church starts yelling at people like its her house, something is romantically off the rails there--or the dame needs to check herself into rehab.
This Pope wants integrity and honesty. He wants priests to be decent men not spoiled adolescents.
This Pope talks a lot about living what you preach. If you preach love, be Love as God is Love.
It isn't love to demean women or disrespect them. Your little white collar isn't a license to be a jerk to anyone and should always reflect Jesus whose shoes you stand in. There is not one example anywhere in scripture of Jesus being rude to, insulting, disrespectful of or demeaning to women. He was exactly the opposite. If you are in your collar for any other reason than to be Jesus in the world you are a fraud, a phoney, a pretender and a hypocrite worse than a Pharisee.
According to Reese there is a difference between a vow of chastity and a promise of celibacy. Jesuits and orders take the former and diocesene priests take the later. Not sure why promises can be broken, but there would be a reason if a man fell in love with and wanted to marry a woman.
This Pope says if you get a woman pregnant and you are a Priest, you must leave.
Because the child deserves a father present.
There is no reason why Diocesene priests couldn't marry, unlike order priests living in community where the logistics would become unwieldy. Its a canon law, not found anywhere in scripture (Jewish rabbis all can marry) and married priests are in the Eastern Catholic church already and with those converts from Episcopalianism. Married Priests make sense for Diocesene priests. They make a world of sense in fact if you understand how to value women and what they would add to the mix.
Sunday, May 05, 2013
Grathias
Did you know that Spanish spoken in Spain is not exactly the same as spanish spoken in Latin America or the Carribean? This should come as no shock as American English is not the same as British English. But it wasn't due to rebellion that the changes in pronunciation happened.After the Conquistadores made their mark on the new Americas under Queen Isabella and King Ferdinand's reign, there was a Hapsburg King, Carlos II, who had a badly misshapen mouth amongst other deformities due, it was believed to Hapsburg inbreeding. Kings of the day, you will recall, were believed to rule by divine right, so it was believed he was God's gift to Spain ruling by divine right, and as such he must be perfect-lets pretend anyway. So his deformity and speech patterns as a result of his misshapen mouth (which appear in this portrait to have a bad underbite and sunken nose and upper lip) caused the people to not want to offend him when he spoke to them-so the nobility started talking around the Court with the same speech patterns which resulted in a Lispification of language. In Spain they say GRATHIAS for Gracias. They
turn a lot of 'c's into 'th' sounds. It is a national lisp.
Its a bit like when my Dad started going more deaf than usual everyone started yelling in the house.
When people want to court or curry favor with the Emperor and he has no clothes, you have two choices- either you ignore it or everyone goes naked. In Spain they did the later.
In America, what if I told you that Obama is BiSexual.
The whole country now has to accept that same sex marriage is a constitutional right?
click here and search you-tube yourself.
Saturday, May 04, 2013
I don't care
How you think you were born.
You have a CHOICE over your behavior. It's no one's civil right to be a knucklehead is it? It's no one's civil right to run a red light because they like speed is it? It's no one's civil right to shoplift a drug store because you are attracted to cheap lipstick is it?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)